zlacker

And I imagine that Gmail makes google very very special in this regard

>>jjtheb+(OP)
Except Gmail does not own the copyrights to the email. So in the context to this article and theme of the post, the owner of the data is king. I don’t think any court would rule Google owned a novel sent over Gmail, little alone the contents of more normative emails.

>>jjtheb+(OP)
FB likewise.

>>hutzli+t3
Exactly. FB happily gives away their ML tech like Llama because what they really care about is the data that can be used to train/tune models. The ML bits are just a commodity and not really worth much (something a new wave of ML startups have yet to realize).

>>mbruml+72
X might have a long-term edge if courts start ruling in favor of lawsuits like these? Being able to legally train on all Twitter data…

>>JCM9+H4
The open source community can improve the tech - and they can then use it on their huge amounts of text and image data.

Legal problems? Update TOS like usual(did they already?). Some might leave, most will stay.

>>mbruml+72
from the Google Terms of Service ( https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en-US ), makes me wonder who owns what, since users of Gmail agree to it.

"We also collect the content you create, upload, or receive from others when using our services. This includes things like email you write and receive, photos and videos you save, docs and spreadsheets you create, and comments you make on YouTube videos."

>>jjtheb+sA
Collect does not mean own.

>>mbruml+kn1
Right. I bet it means "use for language models", though.