When I posted a story online for free I did so because I thought real humans could read it, and perhaps decide they wanted to buy my longer works if they liked it. I understood that someone might read it and not like it, like it but be too cheap to buy paid work, or perhaps read it and use it to study writing techniques I used. I did not however post it thinking an AI might be training itself (with no hope of me getting compensation out of the deal) so that it could further dilute the market for writing.

Don't I have a right that my content not be used in a manner I couldn't anticipate or prevent?

1. I like the way it looks;

2. There actually is a sane market for armoured personal vehicles, as wild as that seems, and as much of an incitement it is to a society in which a non-insane person would want one;

3. Has there ever been a MVA case where a court found that if you camouflage your car you're negligent for just taking it onto public roads? Seems like 'honestly the camouflage confused me and contributed to the accident" sounds like a winning argument from the other driver almost regardless of what happened.

Will they stop asking me to create various different accounts and link accounts together for it then? Create your occulus account! Now link your occulus account to your facebook account. Or do you just want a meta account? No, well too bad - make one! I swear to god I think I got another one of those "you can have a new new new account" emails a few months ago that I promptly ignored.

Did you know that in Canada if the tax authorities go after you in court their factual assumptions are presumed to be right, and you have to prove them wrong. Burden of proof is on the defendant. The legal system is fundamentally designed to favour the state in a ton of tiny (and not so tiny) ways. But that's ok. Lawyers the world over level the playing field (and often even tilt it towards their clients leading to public outrage) by looking at the exact rules of the game and playing it exceedingly well.

Look at Facebook v. Europe. That's a horse race that is. I think Facebook is going to lose, but simply by having lawyers very carefully going over all the rules, Facebook has managed to do its thing in Europe for a decade now despite everyone hating its guts.

The whole idea of the "rule of law" isn't that the rules are fair, it's that they are known and will be binding on all players. Western governments find even that much power to the people to be hugely annoying.

If China were to transition to an AI powered justice (and I don't think they mean real decision making here, but rather just filling out paperwork and supporting documents) it would be a huge advancement for human rights as it would require them to embrace the rule of law.

It doesn't happen quickly. It would just be the same sky your distant ancestors grew up with.