zlacker

[return to "The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement"]
1. kbos87+Na[view] [source] 2023-12-27 15:03:43
>>ssgodd+(OP)
Solidly rooting for NYT on this - it’s felt like many creative organizations have been asleep at the wheel while their lunch gets eaten for a second time (the first being at the birth of modern search engines.)

I don’t necessarily fault OpenAI’s decision to initially train their models without entering into licensing agreements - they probably wouldn’t exist and the generative AI revolution may never have happened if they put the horse before the cart. I do think they should quickly course correct at this point and accept the fact that they clearly owe something to the creators of content they are consuming. If they don’t, they are setting themselves up for a bigger loss down the road and leaving the door open for a more established competitor (Google) to do it the right way.

◧◩
2. hacker+1k[view] [source] 2023-12-27 15:56:06
>>kbos87+Na
Doesn't this harm open source ML by adding yet another costly barrier to training models?
◧◩◪
3. onlyre+zl[view] [source] 2023-12-27 16:04:46
>>hacker+1k
It doesn't matter what's good for open source ML.

It matters what is legal and what makes sense.

◧◩◪◨
4. soulof+dp[view] [source] 2023-12-27 16:25:50
>>onlyre+zl
It doesn't matter what is legal. It matters what is right. Society is about balancing the needs of the individual vs the collective. I have a hard time equating individual rights with the NYT and I know my general views on scraping public data and who I was rooting for in the LinkedIn case.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. notaha+1F[view] [source] 2023-12-27 17:53:15
>>soulof+dp
I have an even harder time equating individual rights with the spending of $xx billion in Azure compute time and payment of a collective $0 to millions of individuals who involuntarily contribute training material to create a closed source, commercial service allowing a single company to compete with all the individuals currently employed to create similar work.

NYT just happens to be an entity that can afford to fight Microsoft in court.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. hacker+sQ[view] [source] 2023-12-27 18:53:51
>>notaha+1F
I don't see a problem as long as there's taxation.

Look at SpaceX. They paid a collective $0 to the individuals who discovered all the physics and engineering knowledge. Without that knowledge they're nothing. But still, aren't we all glad that SpaceX exists?

In exchange for all the knowledge that SpaceX is privatizing, we get to tax them. "You took from us, so we get to take it back with tax."

I think the more important consideration isn't fairness it's prosperity. I don't want to ruin the gravy train with IP and copyright law. Let them take everything, then tax the end output in order to correct the balance and make things right.

[go to top]