Would you approve of AI if companies bought licenses from the artists in their training data? Is this the underlying issue for you, that capitalists aren’t playing by their own rules? This is a reasonable grievance but it’s hardly communist.

Regarding labor, don’t you want people to work less? Yes the machine takes less manpower than a human. That’s potentially liberatory. Of course under bourgeois rule, this technology is used to suppress the wages of artists. But that’s true for everything, which is why the problem is capitalism itself and why we shouldn’t cede control of this new technology to capitalists.

Also I don’t mean to put words in your mouth. I asked those questions to get you to think about how the anti-plagiarism laws you want for AI would manifest in real life. And I said that you’re an advocate for expanding intellectual property because you’re implying that artists should have more protections against having their work copied. When an artist’s work cannot be copied without the right granted to you, then they hold the copyright, a form of IP. This is shortsighted because those who are most able to defend their IPs and who have the most IPs to defend are not solo artists, but corporations. Broaden copyright laws and you’re directly giving power to Disney and the like.

P.S. chill out, damn. You’re being snarky as hell when both me are memorable have been formal with you. I’m not trying to dunk on you and this isn’t reddit.