5 ms·
How does it help humanity as a whole if nobody is able to capture any value for their work?
by throw74774 3y ago
How does it help humanity as a whole if nobody is able to capture any value for their work?
- satvikpendem 3y agoWhat kind of "value" are they capturing? In my viewpoint, something one makes which can be built upon by another freely and without limit is what helps humanity. I don't want anyone necessarily trying to capture rent-seeking "value" out of their work that cannot be extended by others. That is one reason why I abhor copyright, patents, and intellectual property in general.
- throw74774 3y agoYou cannot extend anyone’s work if you have no food or resources.
- satvikpendem 3y agoThat is an economic argument for something like UBI, not an argument to artificially keep jobs and limit technological progress just so people can make money.
- throw74774 3y agoAll jobs are artificially kept, as would UBI be. They are all artifacts of the law. Money is a way to allocate resources, and technological progress depends on people having incentives to contribute. Do you think LLMs are a natural phenomenon?
- satvikpendem 3y ago> technological progress depends on people having incentives to contribute Does it? That stands in stark contrast to open source in general, where people contribute without any monetary incentives.
- throw74774 3y ago> where people contribute without any monetary incentives. First of all you added in the word ‘monetary’, to straw-man the position. Secondly, even if we run with your straw-man, I see little evidence this is true. Most successful projects are either corporately funded or begging for corporate funding. You see article after article here bemoaning the lack of funding for open source.
- satvikpendem 3y agoOkay, if we take any incentives in general, that means anything we do is incentivized. Me eating food is incentivized by me not starving to death. It's not a particularly enlightening argument, hence why I preemptively added "monetary," as we were already talking about economic incentives and UBI, but if you want to explain what other incentives you are talking about, please do so, I would want to hear. In today's world with no UBI, it's no wonder people bemoan the lack of funding, since it's an issue of actually living to produce the OSS one wants to make. If we have something akin to UBI, where we don't force people to stall technological progress in order to satisfy having a job, then this issue would disappear. And to be clear, I'm also not against corporate funding for OSS, so long as it does remain OSS at the end of the day. Linux has corporate funding yet maintains its OSS status.
- throw74774 3y agoEarlier you said “people contribute without any monetary incentives”, and now you are admitting that they do need monetary incentives because there is no UBI. Which is the truth?
- satvikpendem 3y agoPeople contribute already without any monetary incentives, but it sure would help to have UBI. I'm not sure what part you're confused about, as it's not an "either/or" proposition.
- nickfromseattle 3y agoIs an LLM that slurps up all data created ever, without compensating the creators of that data, and then charges for that access not the definition of "rent seeking"? Next question, does this share similarities with academic journals that most folks do consider rent seeking organization?
- satvikpendem 3y agoI never said that was okay either. LLMs should be open source and open data. Yes, this viewpoint shares similarities with academic journals that also rent seek.
- throw74774 3y agoHow do you propose that LLMs are paid for?
- satvikpendem 3y agoThrough government funds, as other public works projects are. Or if people want to privately create their own, they can do so, as long as the results are open.
- throw74774 3y agoWhy should just LLMs be funded that way and not all software?
- satvikpendem 3y agoYou're right, all software should be funded that way.
- throw74774 3y agoWho would decide what to fund?
- casey2 3y agoDoes "work" here mean buying rights to books? And since Pearson aren't paying their fair share, why should the public do the work of holding a trial?
- throw74774 3y agoWhat do you mean they aren’t paying their fair share? You just said they bought the rights. Also it seems like you are saying we should just pre-judge cases without using the courts. Basically just end the rule of law. Not sure that’s a good plan.