AI, though a much faster search engine, has become fast enough for us to realise that things are not invented by individuals. We build our new devices based on the shoulders of what is previously held in common by all.
When I create a new word, or arrange existing words in a new order, do I own the new order of these words? The law says yes. I'm going to show you how that law is unjust.
That is, copyright, patents and trademarks are inherently unjust law in action. And the advent of AI has enabled this wisdom to emerge.
Everything is built on a past idea which is already recorded in history.
Use Grok to find out about something or other. Do it often enough and you will find out about something apparently new. Really find out. What you have just found out will appear incredible. Occasionally it will be the first time anyone has found out about this new thing.
But all Grok is, is a search engine on steroids. Hyper useful, yes.
What you did with your research, using Grok, was to assemble a series of prior known facts already held in common, publicly, into a structure which appears to be something new.
This new thing if you're lucky has significantly more appeal to people on the whole, than another similar thing. So commands an exchange value. Your first priority is to 'Protect' this value from anyone else getting it.
Think about what this action says about you - you want to stop the whole of the rest of the world from using this new thing which you created from other things already held in common by the whole of the rest of the world.
What does this say about you and how you will, say, raise children or vote in democratic elections? We all know exactly what this says about you. Yet it has been made law.
So you used entirely known data and knowledge to create it. How can it be owned by you if it's constructed from parts held in common by all. It would be like saying "I created a new word that has become popular. I created it entirely from the letters of the alphabet. It now belongs to me".
That is absurd and a small child can see it is. The net effect of allowing it to proceed we can see all around us in a social organisation which is incoherent. Yes, other similar pathologies are also contributing to that.
Is this method of so called invention any different to any other method of research, say, using books or just thinking about it using what everyone already knows?
AI, though a faster search engine, has now become fast enough to break the threshold needed for us to realise that things are not invented by individuals. We build on the shoulders of what is previously held in common.
Thus patents are inherently unjust law in action. And AI is now allowing this signal to emerge.
Yes, it sounds like writing poetry made from prior words or writing a piece of music made from prior notes, is covered in law by copyright. But does that mean you own it in the eyes of God?
What do the laws of nature say about this? What will be the unintended consequences if nature forbids it?