btw related to this topic

AI is actually driving towards a historically progressive outcome: the abolishment of copyright. AI necessitates enormous amounts of information to improve, and meaningful and modern information cannot be obtained just through public domain, that means that there is a massive incentive in breaking copyright, and that is what's happening.

We can see it with Meta (and other AI companies) using Anna's archive itself.
Although Anna's archive and other archiving projects were mostly voluntary and relied just on a mostly moral necessity, which is to save humanity's knowledge (and also for pirating reasons), now the economy actually has an incentive in keeping this technically-illegal project alive.

About the destruction of books, that is a problem both for us (since for us, most of humanity, those books will risk becoming lost media), but also for other AI competitors. What that means is that those competitors will start favoring archival projects like Anna's archive even more, thus creating a virtuous circle for the archival of human knowledge.

But, in the end, that knowledge is becoming just temporarily inaccessible, but it won't be lost forever. That means that a revolution (expropriation of all the data centers) would be enough to gain access to it again. Contrary to many past lost information, that information won't be lost to history.

In any case, this development under capitalism obviously does not favor the proletariat, which still remains chained to the usual copyright laws. While being unable to act as those data hoarding corporation and circumvent copyright (even for creative purposes), it also does not have the means to protect its own intellectual production, nor to gain from AI data hoarding. This is where the anti-AI ludditism comes from. But that is obviously not the answer.

A centralized, centrally planned (and renewable energy fueled) AI system, after the communist revolution, would not only benefit the entirety of humanity, but it also would be largely beneficial for anyone interested in creating intellectual work to publish (necessarily) in the public domain. Not only it would be regarded based on its usefulness, but any information would be rewarded on the basis of being human information, thus enabling the creation of rewarded art for anything produced, on the basis of it being genuine human information (LLMs need human information and not self-produced slop), ultimately creating an actually emancipated form of intellectual work.

Under capitalism, in fact, intellectual work is sold as if it were a material copy. This, though, is contradictory: the labour is not spent while copying the information, it is spent while creating the information. This is why piracy is such a diffused phenomenon: copying in the digital age does not cost anything, while the digital copy is sold as a physical one.
Computers have, in fact, destroyed the old paradigm of press, for which each copy is created then sold as a physical product, and where its price is determined by the labor spent on both creating the information itself (usually repaid really fast) and on creating the physical copy (largely the cost for the maintenance of press, plus profits) (this discourse could be extended even to the history of other forms of media, like for example videogames).
During the digital age, every single cent goes into repaying the intellectual work of the producers, which should have largely demolished the costs of the product. In a sense they did (e.g streaming services), but the old mode of production is still a fairly used excuse to drive up profits (e.g cost for "buying" one movie).

Even if you tried to use past intellectual work in a creative and transformative way, or if you tried to implement a patented invention, you'd be arrested and charged as if you tried to physically assault the machines and steal them. This is because capitalism does not make any distinction between intellectual and physical property, in the eyes of law, they are both property. This is because intellectual property is, in fact, stolen labor as much as it is the physical one. The working class is exploited and salaried to create intellectual work/information, and it is robbed of its own creation (the intellectual work is 100% owned by the corporation). The working class will always be the rightful owner of this information, as its creator, and will always be the one capable of working with that information and innovating it.
(Addendum: The role of the intellectual worker, in what is now the digital-AI age, is being transformed into being an operator of the AI. We can see this for programmers, the role of a programmer is, more and more, becomig an operator in the automatized system of programming, basically a worker operating a machine. The same can be said for many others form of intellectual production. In a sense, the era of intellectual artisanship is coming to an end, opening the doors to intellectual industry)

What this means is that, it is not the consumer of the information the one who has to pay for a copy of the information (which they cannot use in other creations, thus contradicting the very nature of knowledge itself), it is the community, as a whole, that has to pay the creator for the creation of information, for the fact, alone, that they have been enhancing human knowledge (and thus creating the conditions for new knowledge to be explored). This is where a socialist system comes, as it should reward intellectual work on the basis of expanding human knowledge. But, on top of that, LLM development may bring this concept further and reward any kind of human creation, thus creating a truly emancipated form of intellectual creation.

"yeah windows is very user friendly while linux breaks constantly" my grandpa's humble windows taskbar deciding on its own to become unusable, whose only way to fix it is by doing some arcane powershell commands that not even i truly understand:

"oh yeah to fix taskbar you need to

Get-AppXPackage -AllUsers | Foreach {Add-AppxPackage -DisableDevelopmentMode -Register “$($_.InstallLocation)\AppXManifest.xml”}

windows is so intuitive how could you ever doubt it"

about this...

SafetyCore, l'app distopica per la scansione di nudo di Android continua a reinstallarsi da sola e Google sta aprendo l'accesso ad altri sviluppatori

Google afferma che l'app per la scansione nascosta di nudi non trasmette dati all'esterno del dispositivo. Ma che dire delle altre app che la utilizzano?

- #SafetyCore ha implementato la classificazione in loco dei contenuti non sicuri per Google Messaggi.
- Google afferma che la classificazione rimane sul dispositivo.
- Google ha introdotto un'API che altre app possono utilizzare per accedere a una funzionalità simile presente sui dispositivi

https://cybernews.com/security/android-content-safety-manager-api-privacy-concerns/

https://www.da.vidbuchanan.co.uk/blog/android-c2pa.html

TLDR; Google is mass-implementing a system mechanism that signs images and videos shot with your camera to "prove" they are real and not made with AI

this, though, does not have anything to do with contrasting deepfakes, since it is 100% possible to sign any arbitrary file through privilege escalations. what it does, in turn, is to statistically signal to AI data hoarders which data is real and human, and which data is AI generated. since AI has a massive problem if fed already AI-generated data while training (literal AI incest), hoarders need a statistically-reliable way to know which data is human.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/aug/28/us-court-rules-pentagon-anthropic-ban-illegal-trump-claude-ai

the bourgeoisie infighting in america is crazy

car: w-wait are you playing pirated or terrorist music????? *shutsdown commands and drives you directly to police*

Rip compagno ✊