Aside from other issues, do you not see a difference between a company committing copyright infringement at global scales never before seen (except with Google Books), who then use the fruit of that to sell a service at a high cost, VERSUS an individual person watching media at home with no profit (where it has been shown that _as a class_ these sorts of infringers spend more on media than other people).

Yes, HN often has cliques wth opposing views, but I don't even think that's necessary to recall in order to see a problem with corporations who, in order to make their product, commit copyright infringement of billions of works.

These opinions are entirely my own personal views. I do not support tortuous infringement.

Yes, in a huge crowd of people, you will get differing opinions.

Do you have any other obvious facts you'd like to pretend are somehow relevant?

I'd bet if you asked a bunch of people off the street, you'd have a number of different takes on the ethics of stealing a loaf of bread, depending who stole it, from whom, and why.

People with a 132TB media collection don’t usually act as if they wrote and directed The Godfather.

AI steals by lacking the ability to properly do either attribution and citation, whether this is accidental or by design.

Downloading an existing PhD thesis without permission is very much different from submitting an existing PhD thesis as yours.

Also,

The crowd: "Knowledge should be free! Culture belongs to all of us! Information must be democratized!"

AI companies *proceed to copy literally everything and put it through virtual blender, until an universal general-purpose problem-solver tool comes out, then give it out for free or serve for peanuts to literally everyone on the planet with Internet connection *

Crowd: bbb..buuut not like that!

Amodei: Check out my 1000 Exabytes torrent collection, which I weaseled out of with a $1.5 billion bribe.

The usual human reading information on the internet does nothing with it. They don't adapt the style, they don't translate, they don't reblog a modified version. The ones that do have been criticized for stealing blog posts already before AI.

An individual pirate is morally a lot less objectionable than the capitalist class pirating from literally everyone else.

Yeah sure, it's on the open Internet, but then again, the capitalists could also actually adhere to the licensing terms of the free software they're hoovering up and all that. These are the same people who want to enforce all kinds of EULAs against the commons, employing measures such as DRM to protect their "intellectual property", so why is it suddenly okay to not comply with IP when it's them doing the infringement?

And that's just with software, but this also affects other creative endeavours. Also the individual HN user's 132 TB Plex server doesn't suck up ludicrous amounts of resources from the commons.