4 ms·

A conclusion made in the article - "these sites are trying to shut their technical gates so others can't gobble up troves of data for AI models to study." Isn'

A conclusion made in the article - "these sites are trying to shut their technical gates so others can't gobble up troves of data for AI models to study." Isn't supported by anything. Maybe it's true? But it may just as well be speculation from the author. Is there any evidence to this?

hotpotamus 3y ago
> And so, by restricting usage, Elon Musk is hoping to prevent its data from being pulled into LLMs. He wants to negotiate with AI companies and get paid for the content that they take. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66093324#:~:text=On%20Saturday%20Twitter%20began%20to,verified%20users%2010%2C000%20per%20day https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66093324#:~:text=On%20Sa....
Terr_ 3y ago
I've never seen any good evidence for it, it's just what operators of the sites (i.e. Reddit, Twitter) claim as a justification. IMO "following the money" indicates their disruptive wholesale access-restrictions are driven by much blander profit-seeking reasons.
- hactually 3y ago
  I mean, it's known that GPT3 was trained on Reddit data with 3 or more upvotes. The training data is still available to download.
  - Terr_ 3y ago
    Perhaps, but what Reddit chose to do is not consistent with its stated reasons. A simple change to the terms-of-service and/or some rate-limits would deter those large-scale (and sue-able) AI companies, until Reddit could introduce some sort of "machine-learning tier" of API access and charges. Instead they announced punishing fees on everyone and everything with barely any warning. That looks a lot more like a general push for blanket monetization. Their "nasty AI learning made us do it" statement looks more like a convenient excuse to deflect user-anger while simultaneously getting their company name in the news right next to hot buzzwords.

4 ms·

A conclusion made in the article - "these sites are trying to shut their technical gates so others can't gobble up troves of data for AI models to study." Isn'

by binarymax 3y ago

hotpotamus 3y ago
> And so, by restricting usage, Elon Musk is hoping to prevent its data from being pulled into LLMs. He wants to negotiate with AI companies and get paid for the content that they take. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66093324#:~:text=On%20Saturday%20Twitter%20began%20to,verified%20users%2010%2C000%20per%20day https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66093324#:~:text=On%20Sa....
Terr_ 3y ago
I've never seen any good evidence for it, it's just what operators of the sites (i.e. Reddit, Twitter) claim as a justification. IMO "following the money" indicates their disruptive wholesale access-restrictions are driven by much blander profit-seeking reasons.
- hactually 3y ago
  I mean, it's known that GPT3 was trained on Reddit data with 3 or more upvotes. The training data is still available to download.
  - Terr_ 3y ago
    Perhaps, but what Reddit chose to do is not consistent with its stated reasons. A simple change to the terms-of-service and/or some rate-limits would deter those large-scale (and sue-able) AI companies, until Reddit could introduce some sort of "machine-learning tier" of API access and charges. Instead they announced punishing fees on everyone and everything with barely any warning. That looks a lot more like a general push for blanket monetization. Their "nasty AI learning made us do it" statement looks more like a convenient excuse to deflect user-anger while simultaneously getting their company name in the news right next to hot buzzwords.