> How long until someone claims one of these images designed to cause trouble for AIs is free speech? And are they right?
They are not, any more running someone through a printing press to kill them is “free press”. Regulating intentional harm without reference to the particular means is not a violation of free speech or other expressive rights just because someone uses a tool that could instead be used as an expressive medium as a mechanism of inflicting the harm.
They are not, any more running someone through a printing press to kill them is “free press”. Regulating intentional harm without reference to the particular means is not a violation of free speech or other expressive rights just because someone uses a tool that could instead be used as an expressive medium as a mechanism of inflicting the harm.