I’m fairly certain it’s been the same number of hoops to get there. Same with actually trying to buy it specifically.
But yeah, its so sequestered away that honestly, I’d probably just outright pirate it if it wasn’t for the fact that it’s readily available on release and I’m familiar with the methodology of it.
I’d say it’s more the problem that if you have any system, someone will try to game the system and succeed eventually. There’s no metric for objectively good objective quality that we can measure. Most liked? Use bots or use the number of likes as a goal where you’ll do a silly thing. Most interesting? That’s completely subjective and varied, the only real way to use that would be to track the individuals and serve “things that interest them.” Best written? I don’t know enough about writing to appreciate what’s good and isn’t and most people don’t either as long as it’s good enough and appeals to them.
On the other hand though, say you’ve been writing a web novel that could be sliced up into 3 separate books or you just have 3 books that’s only now getting released. You could release them over time or you could choose to have all 3 go up at once. Not to mention as a first act of defense, it’s a reasonable action to make and is easily adjustable later on.
There’s probably other reasons why someone would release more than one book at once that’s completely understandable, especially when considering what technically counts as a “book” such as translations or a company publishing titles of multiple authors under one name,
I think the point they were wondering was that a larger computer chip doesn’t seem like progress. The overall density of transistors is the same, so how exactly does scaling that up do anything? Or why does using glass make it better?
Granted, reading the article answers exactly that (though I’ll admit, I don’t entirely understand it). The current material limits how much of the computer chip somehow, this new material allows for more… something.
What does inspiration have to do with anything? And to be honest, humans being inspired has led to far more blatant copyright infringement.
As for learning, they do learn. No different than us, except we learn silly abstractions to make sense of things while AI learns from trial and error. Ask any artist if they’ve ever looked at someone else’s work to figure out how to draw something, even if they’re not explicitly looking up a picture, if they’ve ever seen a depiction of it, they recall and use that. Why is it wrong if an AI does the same?
And they’ll keep being the de-facto option if you just keep accepting that they are. In the end, Adobe software and their alternatives are often similar enough that transitioning from one to the other isn’t difficult.