Hi all, I'll admit being a layperson at the outset and that I'm trying to understand why AI should be allowed to "just look" at the contents of my website or its source code if I don't want to participate in its growth. It isn't a human being or a living being whose curiousity cannot be stifled, it has no inherent inalienable rights. In fact it is just a mask, an avatar used to profit. Would AI exist without a profit motive? Isn't profit its DNA? I'm not against profit but I'm not going to give the tool the rights of a human being, notwithstanding all the recent spate of articles about being more "collaborative" with our new "friend". Sounds like the aliens from "V" have landed.
However, I do want to learn more about AI, the Alien Inside, an appropriate response from the daughter of an Air Force Officer, hahahaha. Please do not hesitate to suggest any reading for me to think about. I'm one of four translators on a panel about the value of collaboration versus AI in translation at the International Book Fair in Guadalajara, Mexico in late November. So I really would appreciate any suggestions for reading material. Thank you all for your patience. *Translator/Owner* *AzulIndica Translations* *North Vancouver BC, Canada* On Sat, Nov 1, 2025, 7:59 a.m. Charles Haynes via Silklist < [email protected]> wrote: > It clearly goes further than that. If that were the goal then wouldn't a > clear copyright be sufficient? "all rights reserved, not to be used for > training AI without explicit written permission." > > It goes much further than simply prohibiting training. "Even indirect use > of the software is forbidden. If, for example, a backend system were to > include such software, it would be forbidden for AI to make requests to > such a system." If one were to release a library under this license, and I > wanted to use that library in publishing my website, AI would be forbidden > to look at any content on my website. That's a much broader restriction > than simply not allowing training on the source of your library. > > On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 at 21:32, Udhay Shankar N <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Sat, 1 Nov 2025, 19:54 Charles Haynes, <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> This is fascinating to me. It's clear that the intent is to treat AI as >>> adversarial and to try to hinder it. What's not as clear to me is why. The >>> fascinating part is that it seems that some people take it as given that >>> this is desirable, but haven't really articulated what the goal is. >>> >> >> Really? The goal (or at least, one obvious goal) seems clear to me. >> >> "I do not want my work turned into training data without my consent." >> >> >> -- > Silklist mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist >
-- Silklist mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist
