zlacker

>>ssgodd+(OP)
Even if they win against openAI, how would this prevent something like a Chinese or Russian LLM from “stealing” their content and making their own superior LLM that isnt weakened by regulation like the ones in the United States.

And I say this as someone that is extremely bothered by how easily mass amounts of open content can just be vacuumed up into a training set with reckless abandon and there isn’t much you can do other than put everything you create behind some kind of authentication wall but even then it’s only a matter of time until it leaks anyway.

Pandora’s box is really open, we need to figure out how to live in a world with these systems because it’s an un winnable arms race where only bad actors will benefit from everyone else being neutered by regulation. Especially with the massive pace of open source innovation in this space.

We’re in a “mutually assured destruction” situation now, but instead of bombs the weapon is information.

>>dissid+B6
So Chinese LLMs are bad actors, but USA LLMs are the good guys?

I don't see it that way, but I'm sure from an American perspective that how it seems.

>>hfhdjd+B7
What? This is about whether one country wants to cede a massive economic advantage to another country.

>>Salgat+18
On the other hand, you could also argue that if AI takes all financial incentives from professionals to produce original works, then the AI will lose out on quality material to train on and become worse. Unless your argument is there’s no need for anything else created by humanity, everything worth reading has already been written, and humanity has peaked and everyone should stop?

Like all things, it’s about finding a balance. American, or any other, AI isn’t free from the global system which exists around us— capitalism.

>>bradch+k9
>financial incentives from professionals to produce original works

People produce countless volumes of unpaid works of art and fiction purely for the joy of doing so; that's not going to change in future.