The Fallout analogy is perfect. Limitation stimulates imagination. I think that’s part of why essentially limitless AI models produce things that are so devoid of it.
Putting aside whether or not I agree with the policy or whether it’s at all reasonable, a policy of restricting access to information because there’s a fear it could be used to create a weapon of mass destruction seems entirely different than restricting access to historical facts because they are embarrassing to the government.
I think there might be a difference between “I’m violating copyright law to enjoy a work of art” and “I’m violating copyright law on a global, species-wide scale to create a trillion dollar company and enrich myself.” Maybe you can argue the former is wrong but there’s no way it’s equivalent to the latter.
If Google changes the internet so that no one visits websites anymore, no one is going to make or maintain websites. And at that point, A) What is left of the internet and B) What is left for Google to summarize via AI?
Still seems far, far more likely that the average user will have their account stolen via password theft/reuse than the more complicated scheme the author is describing. Links instead of codes also fixes the issue.
This will never, ever, ever stop happening until executives start going bankrupt and/or to jail for negligence. Even then it won’t stop, but it would at least decrease in frequency and severity.