Like there’s a *distinction* in the law, but I don’t necessarily see how the distinction creates a push one way or the other #algacc
-
-
-
@sarahjeong@grimmelm seems to say that robotness prevents liability. 0 human reading = 0 infringe. 0 human reading = 0 knowledge.#algacc -
@SherwinPK@grimmelm yes, but not sure how we jumped from a form of safe harbor for robot-reading to expressive reading being replaced -
@SherwinPK@grimmelm specifically, to humans themselves performing more robot-reading. -
@sarahjeong I'm thinking less "humans" doing robot-reading, and systems/companies moving reading from humans to bots.@grimmelm#algacc -
@SherwinPK@grimmelm I think what is nagging at me is that I do see the systemic preference for robot-like behaviors, -
@SherwinPK@grimmelm but I don’t see how it stems from copyright -
@sarahjeong not "stems from;" "is reflected in."@grimmelm - 1 réponse de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.