LLM's are definitely the sort of thing people in general mean when they say "AI".
The act of using "an AI" to generate a license restricting the use of AI can have many motivations, but an obvious one is the simple "use their own weapons against them" principle.
There were plenty of top tier Covid vaccines created in Europe, and a Danish pharmaceutical is currently crushing the US weight loss market: your jingoism is deluding you.
Since value is only defined by what people are willing to pay for it, and lacking any extra common rules, these acts of copying simply signal not accepting the demanded price: so the value claimed by the owner was not the actual value, thus they have lost only their self-deception about the value.
You can just drop "intellectual" and there will be no fundamental change to the argument, it's only the name of the laws defining "property" that change.
> I ask because there were released US NIH emails discussing a base sequence not close to any in natural sequences
If you are seriously asking, you'll have to be much more specific about which exact sequence is being alleged as impossible; there have simply been too many unsound claims about something mysterious in the initial isolates for me to be able to guess what particular claim you want disproven.
If it's the furin site specifically that's supposedly unnatural, then that's simply false, and you can easily find debunkings of this if you just search for "furin site debunk". As an example, here's a recent paper about a very similar furin site (parts of it being identical to the canonical covid-19 site) found in a corona virus from wild bats captured in 2021: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1995820X2... this is simply put explicit observation of this "unnatural feature" found in nature.
You asking a Replika AI for evidence against natural spillover does not amount to making the basic science "an increasingly shaky claim".
Also, try to use less double negations in your writing "I don't necessarily think it's wrong that that comment shouldn't be allowed to pass without challenge." is an atrocious construction.
> My lesson from this: outcomes causal inference is very dependent on assumptions and methodologies, of which the options are many.
This seems like a natural feature of any sensitive method, not sure why this is something to complain about. If you want your model to always give the answer you expected you don't actually have to bother collecting data in the first place, just write the analysis the way pundits do.
A program is not some discreet, one time, thing, it's an extended process involving many many decision points: It's pretty flippant to pretend that statistic reasoning developed for when you draw things out of a hat is equally valid when talking about the chances you will produce a 20 year long enterprise of illegal human experimentation.
Hey, at least Getty handed over some money as the basis for that claim, OpenAI et all are leaning on "our scraper brought it back" to maker their version of that exact claim.
Holy fascist washing batman! There's no centre party in the Tidö government, it just has conservatives puppeteer by a far right party founded by neo-Nazis...
And how does that upend anything? That it fell out already in the car does not seem dramatically different from it falling out after shaking Kennedy a bit.
If it's GDPR you're referring to, I think these bits of Article 17 (right to be forgotten) are relevant:
"""
Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to the extent that processing is necessary:
...
(d) for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes in accordance with Article 89(1) in so far as the right referred to in paragraph 1 is likely to render impossible or seriously impair the achievement of the objectives of that processing; or
(e) for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims.
As the support schedule for python is known ahead of time, this scenario seems pretty well covered by "disclosure of how long the product will receive security updates": just choose the EOL for the relevant python version in the date-picker.
The act of using "an AI" to generate a license restricting the use of AI can have many motivations, but an obvious one is the simple "use their own weapons against them" principle.