diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'content-org/articles.org')
| -rw-r--r-- | content-org/articles.org | 356 |
1 files changed, 356 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/content-org/articles.org b/content-org/articles.org new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c079987 --- /dev/null +++ b/content-org/articles.org @@ -0,0 +1,356 @@ +#+TITLE: Michał Sapka's Emacs Config +#+AUTHOR: Michał Sapka +#+URL: https://michal.sapka.me +#+STARTUP: overview indent logdone + +#+HUGO_BASE_DIR: ~/ghq/vcs.sapka.me/michal-sapka-me/ +#+HUGO_WEIGHT: auto +#+HUGO_AUTO_SET_LASTMOD: t +#+HUGO_SECTION: articles + +* Article :@article: +** DONE Article Library +CLOSED: [2023-12-20 Wed 22:47] +:PROPERTIES: +:EXPORT_FILE_NAME: _index +:END: +Articles are long(-sh) publications that don't fit the blog or any other category. +** DONE Ownership in the digital age :@update: +CLOSED: [2023-12-08 Wed 23:00] +:PROPERTIES: +:EXPORT_FILE_NAME: digital-ownership +:EXPORT_HUGO_CUSTOM_FRONT_MATTER: 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. +:END: +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? + +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]: [[https://archive.nytimes.com/pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/some-e-books-are-more-equal-than-others/][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 + +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]: [[https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/12/playstation-is-erasing-1318-seasons-of-discovery-shows-from-customer-libraries/][PlayStation is erasing 1,318 seasons of Discovery shows from customer libraries]]. Seriously. +[^sony2]: [[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][Several PlayStation users locked out of their accounts, get permanent suspension message from Sony]] +[^google]: [[https://www.wired.com/story/google-stadia-shutting-down-phil-harrison/][The End of Google Stadia]] + +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 + +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 + +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 + +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 + +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). +** DONE On generative content :@update: +CLOSED: [2023-12-20 Wed 22:47] +:PROPERTIES: +:EXPORT_FILE_NAME: generative-content +:EXPORT_HUGO_CUSTOM_FRONT_MATTER: 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. +:END: +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 +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 +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 +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 +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 + +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. |