Then don't release it. There is no license that can prevent your code from becoming training data even under the naive assumption that someone collecting training data would care about the license at all.

What makes you think that there is an "end game"?

Someone figured out how to make computers be able to create content that is costly to distinguish from human-made content. Someone else is using it to pump out AI slop in the hopes that it will make them a quick buck. The platform becomes unusable for anyone that values their own sanity. No "end game" to be found.

AI will be the worst thing that happened to society in a very long time.

Because it is "transformative" and therefore "fair" use.

Seems completely ridiculous when compared to the trouble I was in that one time I pirated a single book that I was unable to purchase.

So if good things happening more because AI made them cheap is an advantage of AI, then bad things happening more because AI made them cheap is a disasvantage of AI.

Those high resolution textures will just take space. You could obviously decrease the graphical fidelity but I'd guess that most players (me very much included) would rather play a very pretty 23GB Helldivers II than a 5GB ugly Helldivers II.

150GB was very annoying, ironically forcing me to install it to a HDD. 23GB isn't even worth thinking about for me.

No, we will get cheap _labor_, not necessarily cheap _products_.

> You weren't talking about inherent value when you wrote "Super-intelligence will make labor worthless (or very cheap) it won't make property worthless." which is what I replied to.

I was talking about value, not price.

> AIs controlled by governments would scare me indeed.

What is the difference?

> Are you joking?! How many cars do you think Altman can buy?!

Why would Elon need to sell more cars? And for what exactly? You have nothing Elon wants.

> Maybe I can't sell coding in the age of AI but I can sell my ability to understand, verify and control complex systems with code written by AIs.

Unless the super-intelligence is better than you here too. Why wouldn't it be?

> Adaptation, creativity and innovation is the name of the game.

It is the name of the game until super-intelligence comes along which will be better at all of this than you. That's exactly the scary thing about super-intelligence.

> My point was that Elon and rich people are interested in you as a customer, not for your labor.

This is the same thing. I can only be a customer if I can bring something to the table that Elon wants from me. That thing is money. I can only bring money to the table if someone that has money needs something I can provide. That thing is human labor. If super-intelligence removes the economic value of human labor, I can no longer earn money and consequently Elon will not be interested in me as a customer.

> See yourself as selling and buying products and services, not your labor, and the world will be full of opportunities.

Where exactly is the difference between me "selling a service" and me selling "labor"?

> "The rich" won't seem like a separate class from you, but regular people you can interact and profit from (while mutually benefiting).

I doesn't matter whether or not you see the rich as a seperate class. What matters is simply the following:

People who own a lot of stuff, don't sell their labor and/or buy a lot of labor will profit if labor becomes cheap. People who don't own a lot of stuff, sell their labor and don't buy a lot of labor face an existential threat if labor becomes cheap.

How do you know? A lot of the stuff I see online could very much be produced by LLMs without me ever knowing. And given the economics I suspect that some of it already is.

For me personally, this means that I read less on the internet and more pre-LLM books. It's a sad development nevertheless.