feat: move some articles back to blog

2 files changed, 392 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/content/blog/2023/digital-ownership.md b/content/blog/2023/digital-ownership.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..83097a9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/blog/2023/digital-ownership.md
@@ -0,0 +1,206 @@
++++
+title = "Ownership in the digital age"
+author = ["Michał Sapka"]
+date = 2023-12-08T23:00:00+01:00
+categories = ["blog", "update"]
+draft = false
+weight = 3001
+abstract = "Digital economy has taken over and with this we need to reevaluate what it means to actually own something. In this article I try to present my definition of ownership and what results from it."
+aliases = ["/articles/digital-ownership"]
++++
+
+It is often said that you can't own anything unless you have a physical thing in your hand.
+So, any digital purchase is not ownership.
+A Blu-ray is.
+
+> ... And in the case of "Oppenheimer", we put a lot of care and attention into the Blu-ray version […] and trying to translate the photography and the sound, putting that into the digital realm with a version you can buy and own at home and put on a shelf so no evil streaming service can come steal it from you. ...  \\
+> Christopher Nolan
+
+This made me wonder and the longer I thought, the less I could agree.
+The simple fact that you own the carrier does not necessary mean that you own the content.
+
+
+## 1. What it means to own something? {#1-dot-what-it-means-to-own-something}
+
+Here are a few questions I asked myself to get to that conclusion
+
+-   **Can you access it?**
+
+This is simple.
+I have paid for it, can I access it assuming all requirements are fulfilled?
+If not, this is a scam.
+
+-   **Does it require subscription?**
+
+Do I need to pay again to use it?
+Case in point: any SASS.
+You don't own any Netflix content.
+
+-   **Can you run it locally?**
+
+I have paid for it. Can I run (play) it on my local machine?
+Or is the provider infrastructure needed?
+Example: any cloud software.
+You can't run Notion on your machine.
+
+-   **Can someone take it from you?**
+
+Can someone block me from accessing it?
+Case in point: Amazon removing copy of _1984_ from Kindles[^1984].
+Note, that the situation where law enforcement or judge can take it from you is completely valid.
+We have a different relation with governments than with private companies.
+
+-   **Are there any locked features?**
+
+Are there features provider can use, but you can not?
+You need to _hack_ your android device to gain root privileges.
+
+-   **Can you sell it?**
+
+Can I sell my copy?
+You can't sell previously bought game on Steam[^steam-acc].
+
+-   **Can you back it up**
+
+Can I create a copy in case of breaking the original?
+Disks can break and data stored on them can rot.
+You can't back up Blu-ray without defeating DRM mechanisms.
+This is the first moment I disagree with Nolan.
+
+-   **Can you copy it?**
+
+Can you create an identical copy?
+It's a digital entity, so identical copy is the easiest out there.
+I don't mention selling here, just to create a copy.
+Again, Blu-ray with DRM block copying.
+
+-   **Can you borrow it?**
+
+Can I borrow it to a friend?
+You can borrow a Blu-ray, but not a Kindle book or PSN game.
+
+-   **Can you access it on wide range of devices?**
+
+Can I access it on a device fulfilling technical requirements?
+I don't expect to run an TRS-80 game on PlayStation 5, but why can't I play my DVD bought in Europe after traveling to North America?
+Ergo, any DRM "secured" digital good is not owned.
+
+-   **Can you modify it?**
+
+Can you change the home screen layout of iPhone outside what the designers provided?
+
+-   **Can you repair it?**
+
+A bit self-explanatory.
+Can you repair your MacBook assuming you have the skills required?
+What about the Windows copy you use?
+
+[^1984]: [Some E-Books Are More Equal Than Others](https://archive.nytimes.com/pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/some-e-books-are-more-equal-than-others/)
+[^steam-acc]: I know that people sell entire Steam accounts with games, but this is bypassing the no-sell policy; not a feature.
+
+Nowadays, it's almost impossible to make a transition regarding a digital good which would tick most of those ticks.
+Back before everything went digital it would be difficult to find cases which **wouldn't**.
+Not all of them, as it would be difficult to copy a refrigerator (but not impossible) but the sentiment remains.
+It used to be that owner was able to exercise much broader freedom of usage.
+
+
+## 2. Impact of ownership on my perceived value {#2-dot-impact-of-ownership-on-my-perceived-value}
+
+As I've hopefully explained before, almost all digital goods on the mark don't fall into "possible to own" category.
+But if we pay for it, where does it leave us?
+I needed a word to define the result of transaction which does not pass ownership.
+And there is such word: _rent_.
+
+Renting was always there.
+I would rent videotape for a local rental.
+I would rent a book from local library.
+I would rent a car from car rental company.
+None of these were ever considered a _purchase_, because why would we?
+I paid for access, but whatever I rented was still owned by the other party.
+
+This is not the exact case as with the primary subject here.
+I am lured to believe that I own "my digital purchase" because the timeframe is not defined upfront.
+Therefore, I think of a Steam, Amazon, PSN, iTunes "purchase" as indefinite renal.
+I may lose access at any moment[^sony], I just don't know when.
+It may happen due to multitude of reasons: the company may go bankrupt, the license may expire[^sony], my account may become blocked[^sony2], or the company may pull out and close the service[^google].
+[^sony]: [PlayStation is erasing 1,318 seasons of Discovery shows from customer libraries](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/12/playstation-is-erasing-1318-seasons-of-discovery-shows-from-customer-libraries/). Seriously.
+[^sony2]: [Several PlayStation users locked out of their accounts, get permanent suspension message from Sony](https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/several-playstation-users-locked-out-of-their-accounts-get-permanent-suspension-message-from-sony-2472107-2023-12-05)
+[^google]: [The End of Google Stadia](https://www.wired.com/story/google-stadia-shutting-down-phil-harrison/)
+
+The wording here is exact: I may _loose access_. Yup, this is what I mean when I think of renting.
+
+There was, however, one huge benefit of renting when compared to buying: the price.
+It was always much cheaper to rent a move than buy one.
+It made perfect sense.
+I was able to watch a rented movie for a few days, and then return it.
+The renter would invest in purchase, I would pay a small amount and the world would still do its thing.
+
+In the digital age this gain is no longer valid.
+When renting becomes the only option, there is no reason to offer it cheaper than ownership.
+And therefore renting of digital goods is expensive.
+
+Too expensive.
+If we start to think that the "buy" button actually means "rent", that $60 shiny new game stops making so much sense.
+
+
+## 3. Digital scarcity {#3-dot-digital-scarcity}
+
+But since it is commonly understood as "purchase", then companies can try to use our collecting impulses.
+And they are strong, just look at any random tech channel.
+People want to collect, and to put things in their collections.
+
+Steam library is often a reason to brag about.
+I have a thousand games they say!
+I played 10, but I have 1000!
+
+And so there are preorders.
+Get you digital purchase early, be the first to own it.
+Get **rare** add-ons (as if anything digital can be rare).
+Pay extra for super-duper version with limited horse armor (nothing stops them from releasing the bonus content later on).
+
+The idea come from olden days, where getting stuff soon may have been the only way to actually get it.
+If it's vinyl record they are selling, they indeed may run of it.
+If it's download, the only way to stop next person from it is greed.
+
+
+## 4. "My" page {#4-dot-my-page}
+
+A special mention goes to Facebook with their brilliant "My page" marketing.
+"Visit our Facebook page" is what I often see and hear.
+And yet there nothing "theirs" on that page except of content, to which right were transferred to Meta the moment someone hit "send".
+This is (still) free, but using the "My" word is further eroding the meaning of ownership.
+Please, don't.
+
+
+## 5 The pirate in the room {#5-the-pirate-in-the-room}
+
+And now the sad part: the closest way to own digitual stuff  warez[^dmca].
+Crackers, in order to bypass the DRM mechanism (now called jail breaking) need to remove limitations enforced on the end user.
+You can copy a pirated game, you can borrow it, you can modify it, you can archive it.
+It's more _yours_ than the biggest of Steam libraries.
+
+[^dmca]: My views on DMCA are not part of this article. Someday I'll write one and get banned from Google.
+
+
+## 6. Conclusion {#6-dot-conclusion}
+
+Where does this leave me?
+I can't change anything and the transformation to digital-renting of everything is here to stay.
+Everyone wants me to rent to something - be it streaming service, or a car company.
+
+However, when I stopped thinking that I can actually own anything, my perceived value of digital stuff couldn't be lower.
+I may drop a few bucks for a digital-download.
+But above that?
+Hard sell.
+
+Meaning of words change over time, and they always had.
+The definition of "ownership" was clear but no longer is.
+The word can mean any financial transaction or be nothing more than marketing ploy.
+You can have zero ownership (Netflix), a bit of it (PSN), a lot of it (GOG[^gog]).
+And this gradation correlates my interest of doing business.
+I'll ****gladly**** pay an author for a DRM-free PDF of their book if I can download it.
+I'll happily buy a DRM-free game from GOG.
+
+But below that level of purchasing? Well, I can either skip it completely or think of other ways of obtaining it.
+
+[^gog]: [GOG 2022 update #2: our commitment to DRM-free gaming](<https://www.gog.com/news/bgog_2022_update_2b_our_commitment_to_drmfree_gaming>).
diff --git a/content/blog/2023/generative-content.md b/content/blog/2023/generative-content.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..471b733
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/blog/2023/generative-content.md
@@ -0,0 +1,186 @@
++++
+title = "On generative content"
+author = ["Michał Sapka"]
+date = 2023-12-20T22:47:00+01:00
+categories = ["blog", "update"]
+draft = false
+weight = 3002
+abstract = "I don't believe that AI will kill us, but I strongly believe it will lessen us. Here I try to describe that by looking at impact on art, culture, tech, and potential benefits."
+aliases = ["/articles/generative-content/"]
++++
+
+It seems that generative content from "modern" AI models has been with us forever.
+In reality this is still a new fad.
+The feeling is here because it seems that every few days we hear new product or controversy.
+
+However, I still remember that computers were to be unable to replace humans in _creative_ work.
+That the _human_ part is irreplaceable, and machines can only reproduce.
+I think it still the case.
+But, somehow, artists, techies, and all kinds of other folks all over the world are afraid of loosing their means of living.
+Rightfully so.
+But why?
+
+
+## 1. Mass-art market {#1-dot-mass-art-market}
+
+When I was younger, I was very into cinematography.
+We had so many directors with their voices - Jarmush, Lynch, Smith, Tarantino, Cronenberg, Carpenter, Boyle, Ritchie, Anderson, or Fincher.
+And that's just the USA!
+They had the voice - even when imitating, the movies were distinctly _theirs_.
+They got chances, so we all knew them.
+It is no longer the case.
+The mid-budget movie is almost non-existent, and that's where the creativity strived.
+The popular movies, the ones that make all the money, are indistinguishable copies of each other.
+What earns the money is the same, big budget CGI fest without any real meaning or personal touch.
+
+In photography the end product is so removed from the original, that often it is impossible to see similarities.
+Everything that is not perfect is corrected and removed.
+We don't see people from posters on the street because they don't exist in the same reality we do.
+This is what we call _content_, this shapeless blob filling platforms.
+
+The mass-market "art" (and I use the term here very loosely) was removed from the _human_ a long time ago.
+Why take chances, when we know what will work?
+And if you know what will work, why even bother with humans?
+An AI can create the script, and we can reuse that 3d model of Bogart - because why not?
+What we see and what we pay for is no longer _human_.
+It's more machine than that - endlessly modified to be as close the blob of mass appeal as possible.
+Indistinguishable from each other.
+
+And this is where generative algorithms strive.
+When we exactly know what we want to produce, where there is a mathematical equation of beauty, we're no longer in **human** creativity.
+
+Since the most popular _content_ is made from the same mold, LLM models can create it as well.
+In fact, it can create it better, as those _imperfections_ that a human might have missed, an AI can easily remove.
+
+All the Dall-E pictures are perfect. They are impossibly complex and complying to the popular norms.
+
+They are also boring.
+It's the imperfections that make _art_, well, _Art_.
+No human creation is perfect and this why computer generated _content_ can not be called art.
+It's too studied, too ideal, too perfect.
+
+But the mass market pulp is what allows _artists_ to live.
+This is where they make the money.
+This is what pays the bills, what puts the food on the table.
+Why pay 50EUR and wait 2 weeks for a Fiver order?
+You can get just as good result in 10 minute chat with a bot.
+
+LLMs have reversed humanity.
+I fear that we are getting back to the state where _art_ may come only from _suffering_;
+where artists live to create that one piece which may immortalize them, but this life is not what modern world promises.
+We are to no longer see _hungry_ people in developed countries.
+We are to no longer experience _pain_ in pursue of _happiness_.
+Why would anyone choose it?
+
+Therefore, I am afraid that this will decrease the number of people who choose creativity as their living hood.
+Without them, we will be destined to status-quo of mediocrity
+It will be perfect, but it will be soulless.
+
+Just as the mass market is now, just without anyone pushing it forward.
+And with us, running the hamster wheel of never ending _content_.
+
+
+## 2. Tech market {#2-dot-tech-market}
+
+The other, very popular, use case is code generation.
+
+GitHub Copilot can translate a short query into an evaluable code.
+It is sold as a mean to automate the _boring_ and _repetitive_ tasks - creating boilerplate, configurations, loops, or simple algorithms.
+But are those really lesser tasks than the big ones?
+
+I've been a professional Software Engineer for 10 years now.
+My journey has not been the typical, one where one finishes either IT college, or a boot camp.
+I'm self-thought, and I joined It Crowd from other occupation by sheer luck.
+The company needed _Ruby_ developer and boom - there I was.
+Not the perfect candidate, but I was capable, eager and hungry.
+
+I've made a lot of mistakes, I've wasted a lot of time, I've taken down the production on a few occasions.
+All of those could have been avoided if I used a code generation.
+
+But it's impossible of overstate how important those menial tasks were in making me into a real _Software Engineer_.
+
+With every mistake, I learned.
+With every issue, I became swifter to jump into action,
+With every boring, repetitive task[^ruby] I gained insights into how stuff works.
+[^ruby]: with _Ruby_ and _Ruby on Rails_ there aren't many of those but still, you do the same things from time to time.
+
+But the biggest growth came from the most hated task of all - writing tests.
+It is there where I learned how to write a usable contract; it is there where I learned the value of documentation-as-a-code[^cdac]
+Would I learn anything from "hey copilot, write tests for this class"?
+I doubt.
+[^cdac]: very often the best documentation of a contract is the test for it.
+
+This was what every intern/junior would do - the dirty work.
+With the dirty work comes the realization that the real world is not perfect, not every code is good and not every developer is good at being a developer.
+And with Copilot we are loosing it.
+
+We are losing it two ways: first, juniors will not learn; second junior will not be hired.
+We are already seeing that there are much fewer offers for sub-senior positions.
+Why would it be different?
+A senior aimed with code generation can do the work of many junior and one senior.
+It makes _perfect_ economic sense.
+
+But this is also the suicide of the industry.
+Without new blood, the tech crowd will shrink.
+Companies want infinite growth, and will not stop at anything to accomplish it.
+We've seen all the visa scandals, the inclusivity actions, the offshoring[^contr].,
+It's clear that all those had only one goal: to increase the pool of _cheaper_ candidates.
+The typical programmer is expensive; someone fighting to leave poverty is not.
+But now the competition is no longer _someone_ cheaper, but rather something that's never tired, and can create infinite number of creations, but is still _cheaper_ than a human can ever be.
+When was the last time you tried to outrun a train?
+When was the last time you tried to fight a machine to give your children a better start?
+[^contr]: this is not the place where I want to address those subjects, but their existence is important for this article.
+
+
+## 3. Maybe I am wrong {#3-dot-maybe-i-am-wrong}
+
+But what if I am wrong?
+We've seen similar things before.
+Ever since the beginning of industrial revolution, more and more industries were mechanized and automated.
+The machines needed someone to take care of them, to design them.
+And the rest of the populi moved to other areas.
+
+Will it be the same?
+Well, how much work does an _algorithm_ need to operate?
+We are still in development phase, so we see a lot of people working there.
+But when we will reach plateau?
+There will be a time when it will be good enough.
+A moment when companies will buy it and not expect it to be better.
+How many people will be needed then?
+What will be left to do?
+
+Will Universal Basic Income be enough?
+It assumes infinite growth, and this may be in the hands of very few, gigantic companies.
+We already see how big influence Altman and Open AI has.
+There will still be rich, the 1%, so money will still be an issue.
+Will we simply do yet another October Revolution?
+
+
+## 4. Utopia that is false {#4-dot-utopia-that-is-false}
+
+The best case scenario is that humanity, as a whole, will ascend.
+Free from the shackles of menial task, we will all be poets and explorers.
+
+This is what _Star Trek_[^old] is all about - a world where we no longer need to create and work to survive.
+In place of that, we are free to pursue adventure, knowledge.
+With nothing to gain, why one would need power?
+Money?
+We can focus on the humanity as one entity, to make it better.
+[^old]: old Trek, at last.
+
+In _Star Trek_ this was not created by removing jobs but by presence of _replicators_ - a device capable of creating virtually anything.
+No longer food is scarce, we can simply create it.
+
+Replicators are like LLM, but they create things of intrinsic value.
+This is what removed the shakles.
+And this is the biggest difference: LLM don't create anything that will actually free us.
+It will never make our lives better and freer.
+It will make it easier for _few_ on the cost of _many_.
+
+
+## 4. Summary {#4-dot-summary}
+
+I believe that LLMs will steal of us younger talent, who has yet to make a dent.
+They won't have the chance to learn and earn on the basic stuff, so they will not be in position to create the big thing.
+The cost of using LLMs is so low (and will only become cheaper), that there will be no place for them.
+And I am afraid that the post-LLM market can find worthy place for them.