> The ownership void: If the code is truly a “new” work created by a machine, it might technically be in the public domain the moment it’s generated, rendering the MIT license moot.
Im struggling to see where this conclusion came from. To me it sounds like the AI-written work can not be coppywritten, and so its kind of like a copy pasting the original code. Copy pasting the original code doesnt make it public domain. Ai gen code cant be copywritten, or entered into the public domain, or used for purposes outside of the original code's license. Whats the paradox here?
They say "if" it's a new work, then it might not be copyrightable, I guess. You suppose that it's still the original work, and hence it's still got that copyright.
I think they are rhetorically asking if your position is correct.
And the consensus among professional translators is that MTPE only saves time if you're willing to accept a half-assed result. For them to edit MT up to the standard of manual translation takes just as much expertise and effort as translating it manually in the first place.
I have no particular interest in translation, but clearly when the person saying X is bad depends financially on you not buying X, you must take their word with a grain of salt.