zlacker

Yeah, the legal and financials parts of ChatGPT are very questionable. I don't think Google would launch a service that would open them up to so many lawsuits unless it was very profitable, and I doubt ChatGPT is very profitable currently.

Bard was likely not trained on copyrightable data, that makes it safe from lawsuits but also removes most of the usecases people want ChatGPT for.

And it isn't just about lawsuits, since Google need to keep advertisers happy or they would leave like they leave Elon Musk they can't afford to jeapordise that with questionable launches.

>>Jensso+(OP)
Why is it legally questionable?

>>Jensso+(OP)
It was 100% trained on copyrightable data. You can tell by using it and Google has a history of "ask for forgiveness not permission" when it comes to data mining.

>>i8comm+P7
If it wasn't there wouldn't be lots of lawsuits being filed about it.

https://innovationorigins.com/en/openai-and-googles-bard-acc...

>>boh+Ua
> Google has a history of "ask for forgiveness not permission" when it comes to data mining.

For very profitable things. This isn't very profitable, which is why I added that part to my comment. Google has a very good understanding what they get sued for and how much those lawsuits costs, if it is profitable anyway they go ahead.

>>Jensso+uk
After Open AI's proposed share sale it will likely be valued at $80-90 billion. That seems pretty profitable.

>>boh+um
That doesn't come from ChatGPT though, that comes from expectation of much more products in the future and the possibility of them beating Google.