It's only fair if 99% of revenue flows back to humanity. The models are worthless without its training data.
replyThat’s what standing on the shoulders of giants refers to. This is how science has always worked. The generated papers have attributions and citations just like if a human wrote them.
reply>That’s what standing on the shoulders of giants refers to. This is how science has always worked.
replyYes, but automating and commercializing a process makes it inherently different. Just because everyone has always been welcome to drink from the village well, that countless generations have worked tirelessly to dig, maintain, and improve, doesn't mean that there's no basis for complaint when Nestle sticks a pump down it and starts draining the aquifer to bottle and sell.
The lack of an existing law (or custom) against new behavior doesn't actually render it necessarily non-grotesque.
This analogy doesn’t work. A more apt analogy is Nestle putting a pump down in the well and sucking out industrial quantities of water but simultaneously digging more wells as well. The “more wells” is more avenues for further research building on what it has proved/found.
replyBut Nestle’s pump not only doesn’t deplete the well, it’s adding to it!
replyNo, it's able to reach deeper and pump more out than ever before, democratizing access to the water from the well, at the minor cost of the people of the village no longer having a well. But they're welcome to buy plastic bottles of their own water along with everyone else.
replyThat they can afford only while the cost is subsidized. Then the well-in-a-bottle bubble will explode because everyone will realize that the business has never been sustainable, nobody really believed in it after all. But the well now has been damaged beyond repair.
replyIs this actually how water pumping works, or are we extending the metaphor to imply that the AI is creating knowledge? Because I would dispute the latter if the effect is that the number of people with a deep understanding of a subject declines.
replyThe giants are quite often credited by name, or have their work cited.
replyOr are revered teachers that you'll never forget.
reply> That’s what standing on the shoulders of giants refers to. This is how science has always worked
replyOpenAI's Navier-Stokes finding is closer to Crick and Watson in respect of Franklin's research than conventional science.
Pretty sure AI is more akin to standing on the shoulders of giants and peeing into the wind
replyTake a philosophy class or read more books. Your response is devoid of humanity and philosophical introspection.
replyMany organizations are giving away capable models for free.
replySo.. they’re being trained on all of the information that some used to make their living with by writing books, presenting seminars, etc. on a topic.. without paying for it, and then giving it all away for free?
replyIdk if that’s much better
For now. Once people are hooked, and/or once some of that investment capital starts to be expected to generate some dividends (see https://isaiprofitable.com/), free use will be very limited.
replyIt's good enough that you could go off-the-grid, to a cabin in the woods like the Unabomber, and use it for some tasks.
reply