[Mesnick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DH21965

This is a terrible argument. They are HUMAN.

That's it. And they could answer for their plagiarism before society and the law. Why this doesn't happen is a completely different question. But the point is that AI is also used by humans to create works. And, if this person using AI is conscientious enough, then he will clearly check the created work for plagiarism. Let's take a book as an example.There is an author, there is a representative of the publishing house who receives it, there is an editor, most often more than one. And this is still the most simplified scheme. And in the case of a song or film, there will be even more such links. Do you really think that all these people were corrupted by the AI ​​and in other circumstances would have done their job honestly? Of course not. They would have found another way. They would download the book in another language, translate it into Google and replace the names in Word.It would have turned out even more sloppy than with the help of AI.
In principle, I do not understand the desire to see the problem in AI, and not in the person who uses it. It is as pointless as blaming a car for an accident or a bat for a beating. AI is a tool. Advanced, but a tool. Not a person or even a living organism (although even aggressive dogs are the responsibility of their owners). So people should be punished for crimes committed with the help of AI.
Plus, I wonder why the other side of the coin is ignored. AI can also be used to detect plagiarism. Improve the ?search by image? function a little and you?re done. Of course, this requires human supervision and verification, but still the process becomes much easier and faster.
Although this creates the following problem. In the age of postmodernism, how many human-made works can withstand the emotionless machine test? Will it Star Wars pass? Matrix? Films of the same Tarantino? Power Rangers after all? But for many, these films are the foundation of media culture that has shaped their personality. The problem is that plagiarism is already widespread and widespread. They turned a blind eye to it for decades and AI looks like a very belated attempt to draw a line, at the same time throwing responsibility onto someone who cannot fight back. But it's not fair and it won't work.
I sincerely believed that Luddism remained at the beginning of the last century, but apparently, learning from other people?s mistakes is too boring. Bans never work. They didn't work with witchcraft, alcohol, abortion. They won't work with AI either. They will simply transfer the AI ​​to the criminal underground, which will only worsen the situation. But fines are a completely different matter. Simply because they will push to improve the AI ​​and create a version that avoids plagiarism. Not out of good intentions, but to lead the market. Do I really have to explain how the business works?