I work in infosec and I would give up everything I own and die happy if infosec became a solved problem and the profession died forever.

It's hard for me to imagine a profession that should exist in a utopian society. People should just be able to explore and build cool shit. People should have instant access to food when they're hungry and housing when the weather gets bad, and we could live in a society that does all that without having rent extraction baked into everything.

I'm not sure how to square

> It's hard for me to imagine a profession that should exist in a utopian society

with

> People should have instant access to food when they're hungry and housing when the weather gets bad

You don't think that farming, baking, and building are professions?

I assume they mean that it is all already automated in the utopian society. And I would kinda agree that that would be utopian. But sadly we live in the real world where greed rules pretty much everything, meaning that it will remain an unobtainable dream for (most likely) ever.

There's unfortunately a huge contingent of people who would strongly oppose a utopia where we all could live as equals in comfortable, luxurious lifestyles, where robotics, replicators, AI, and automation took care of everyone's needs and wants.

They oppose the "live as equals" part.

> we all could live as equals in comfortable, luxurious lifestyles, where robotics, replicators, AI, and automation took care of everyone's needs and wants.

Until one person decides we should change something about this utopia, arguments break out, populations schism, and we're back to fighting over finite resources once again.

Utopias and conflict-free societies are pipedreams

Farming and baking are already very thoroughly automated and their labor force completely proletarianized.

There were the fundaments of communism two centuries ago.

Do you think OpenAI has a New York Times subscription? Do you think that's actually relevant to what the New York Times is arguing here?

The vast a majority of text that is being claimed to have been "stolen" was never for sale. Reddit posts, deviant art images, personal websites, etc.

> I don’t believe any of these companies have paid for all the books they have trained on.

Did you miss the "book burning" hysteria from a couple weeks ago? These companies have been trying to digitize copyrighted materials legally, in which copyright law demands destruction of the original, and people shit on them even harder.

It's clearly not a problem for these companies to buy the books they need for training, and they have been doing that in crazy high volumes. Lots of good training materials simply cannot be legally purchased though, and should those parts of human knowledge just be ignored?

I mean, I don't seem to get to say, "Oh I want this but I can't buy it so I'll just steal it LOL", so why should AI companies?