4 ms·

> have the right to consume everyone’s information, build their entire business with it and then sell that back to the people That’s quite literally what googl

> have the right to consume everyone’s information, build their entire business with it and then sell that back to the people That’s quite literally what google has done for 25 years, just with advertising for monetization.

medvezhenok 4y ago
Yes, and arguably Google has been way under-regulated for the externalities they caused to the system (one example is having adversarial bidding wars for companies over their own keywords, which is simply a rentier tax on Google advertising) I think we're finally coming around on that (I think a lot of regulators were slow on antitrust in the internet space because the harm to the consumer/environment is not immediately obvious - i.e. it's mostly non-monetary externalities) Same as America as a whole and offshoring to reduce labor cost. The externalities are slow but they're clearly there in the increasing polarization and the growth of the precariat.
basisword 4y ago
It’s not. Indexing and linking to primary sources is very different to consuming all of those primary sources and spitting it back without attribution. Google entered this area a bit with the info boxes they display alongside results but it’s a very different proposition from AI.
- Avicebron 4y ago
  This is an interesting point, if someone develops a card catalogue for a library, they aren't providing a market substitute for each one of those books. As far as I know, "fair use" law has to account whether or not the end product can serve as a substitute for the original work.
  - nradov 4y ago
    Fair use copyright law in the US allows for selling summaries of books, and those can serve as a substitute for the original work in many cases. Many students use Cliff Notes to get through their literature courses without ever doing the assigned reading. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature
qgin 4y ago
Except it was considered by most as a win-win situation. Google consumed it for the purpose of directing people to the original content (except for Google’s recent foray into info cards and quick answers within search). The info in the LLM doesn’t reference back to the source. There may be 1000 sources for a given concept embedded in the model anyhow.
Angostura 4y ago
And that's what no-robots was for

medvezhenok 4y ago

Yes, and arguably Google has been way under-regulated for the externalities they caused to the system (one example is having adversarial bidding wars for companies over their own keywords, which is simply a rentier tax on Google advertising) I think we're finally coming around on that (I think a lot of regulators were slow on antitrust in the internet space because the harm to the consumer/environment is not immediately obvious - i.e. it's mostly non-monetary externalities) Same as America as a whole and offshoring to reduce labor cost. The externalities are slow but they're clearly there in the increasing polarization and the growth of the precariat.

basisword 4y ago

It’s not. Indexing and linking to primary sources is very different to consuming all of those primary sources and spitting it back without attribution. Google entered this area a bit with the info boxes they display alongside results but it’s a very different proposition from AI.

Avicebron 4y ago
This is an interesting point, if someone develops a card catalogue for a library, they aren't providing a market substitute for each one of those books. As far as I know, "fair use" law has to account whether or not the end product can serve as a substitute for the original work.
- nradov 4y ago
  Fair use copyright law in the US allows for selling summaries of books, and those can serve as a substitute for the original work in many cases. Many students use Cliff Notes to get through their literature courses without ever doing the assigned reading. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature

qgin 4y ago

Except it was considered by most as a win-win situation. Google consumed it for the purpose of directing people to the original content (except for Google’s recent foray into info cards and quick answers within search). The info in the LLM doesn’t reference back to the source. There may be 1000 sources for a given concept embedded in the model anyhow.

Angostura 4y ago

And that's what no-robots was for