Hopefully IP and copyright laws will evolve in parallel to prevent or highly penalize stuff like that.

I imagine the poor will want their mind state covered by copyright/intellectual property laws, and the rich will ignore that if it can help them amass more wealth - just like LLM and diffusion model training was bootstrapped off the back of creatives without payment. i.e. the law doesn't apply if you're rich enough.

> just like LLM and diffusion model training was bootstrapped off the back of creatives without payment. i.e. the law doesn't apply if you're rich enough.

Or search engines.

I don't know how the legal cases will go, all I can say is that my suspicion is that, like search, such AI are simply too useful to be outlawed… but my armchair opinions are almost as far as possible from a guarantee, and even search had to change in response to copyright infringement laws.

None of that is related to my point.

A world where I get cloned and an unaware is distinctly divergent from a world where there is only one of me each time I wake up, regardless of how society handles it.

yes, a world where there are two of you is different from a world where there's one of you. I feel like this is something Aristotle must have covered, but it is important to point it out!

Based on this entire thread it did seem necessary to state.

Clearly, otherwise you would not have stated it.

>if having copies of you walking around was a normal thing, our language and expectations would reflect that.

Yes, and if the law of excluded middle didn't hold, then all kind of magical things would happen too.

But it does, and they don't.