Question for Anti-AI folks: Would you still be against usage of LLMs if the following conditions had been met:

• Anything made by them is automatically considered public domain and a derivative work.
• Models cited all training data they used, including copyrighted and otherwise unauthorized data.
• The Models could be entirely self hosted, running on a home computer (no data center or $2000 GPU needed)
• Corporations did not own or control any of this, it was just discovered by some random college student or something and released publicly to everyone for free.

It seems to me like the actual problems people have with “AI” are really just problems of venture capitalists having almost complete dominance over the field.

Now I would Imagine in a parallel timeline where such a technology was created and released by something like a random college student or some underground group, it would get the same kind of treatment Napster did, and lets never for get that Aaron Swartz was driven to suicide by the legal system for doing a much much smaller version of the exact some thing these AI Corporations have been doing.

The problem isn’t the technology, its not the tools being made, its the people who are claiming ownership of those tools when they had no right to them in the first place. Either LLMs belong to all of us as public domain, copyright laws need a complete re-thinking, OR none of this is legal and the rules just don’t apply to corporations.

🧵2/3