> If you train a meat-based intelligence by having it borrow a book from a library without any sort of permission, license, or needing a lawyer specialised in intellectual property, we call that good parenting and applaud it.
If you’re selling your child as a tool to millions of people, I would certainly not call that good parenting.
"Child actor" is a job where the result of the neural net training is sold to millions of people by the parents.
To play the Devil's Advocate against my own argument: The government collects income taxes on neural nets trained using government-funded schools and public libraries. Seeing as how capitalists are positively salivating at the opportunity to replace pesky meat employees with uncomplaining silicon ones, perhaps a nice high maximum-marginal-rate tax on all AI usage might be the first big step towards UBI and then the Star Trek utopia we all dream of.
Just kidding. It'll be a cyberpunk dystopia. You know it will.
"Child Actors" are more an exception. You can train a million children on the books of harry potter, only 3 or 4 will be good enough to be actors. The children that "made it" did so from grit and passion (or other traits) but very little from that reading of 10-20 books.
The AI that reads the books, and can do what LLMs do, are guaranteed to sold for billions in API calls.
What about a company funding books and education materials to train its employees into specialists, and then selling access to them to other businesses? E.g. any honest consulting company.