4 ms·
What’s the incentive for people to allow the crawler at all? Unlike search engines, chatgpt doesn’t cite references at all (last I tried) or even if it does it
by agnosticmantis 3y ago
What’s the incentive for people to allow the crawler at all?
Unlike search engines, chatgpt doesn’t cite references at all (last I tried) or even if it does it often makes up nonexistent references. And because it rephrases the content, there’s often no way to prove they got the material from a particular source, so harder to litigate plagiarism too.
How would contributing to the weights of this LLM help content creators?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- planb 3y agoJust one example: As a software vendor, you probably want OpenAI to index your documentation, so questions about your software can be answered by ChatGPT. Not everybody who creates content is a "content creator" (when did this word get the specific meaning "people who earn money or reputation from creating content").
- terrytanys 3y agoThat's good point. ChatGPT itself is very valueable. The problem is for the people who live off creating content.
- agnosticmantis 3y agoThat’s a good point, I hadn’t thought of these cases. On a second thought, I guess a lot of marketing content would also love to be crawled by anything that crawls…
- rawoke083600 3y agooh 100% The hoops our current generation has jumped through(including me) to make abs sure google can index your site ! I think for some mental-models or product-segments (like software vendor example) it's definitely essential to be part of the new paradigm of information-access
- Fnoord 3y agoThe software vendor documentation, for sure. But the book writer who wrote a detailed, expert book on how to deal with the software ("Photoshop for Dummies"?). OpenAI might be seen as a competitor. A government would be easier to say all their data isn't allowed to be crawled, so they can sue later or just say no later on when they figure something classified was in there, or simply when they change their mind. I believe the default response should be 'no, we'll look into it' for anyone, and then carefully let legal take a look at it (gonna be expensive). For the software vendor, too. Although their crown jewels are likely the source code to their product(s).
- gfedtbyby 3y agoIt wouldn't help in any way, probably the opposite. Since there is no way to distingush search engines from other crawlers we should probably say goodbye to what remains of the open internet...
- sznio 3y agoIf you're a marketer you won't care about citations. Just spam your product enough so that GPT "learns" it's the correct choice.
- ohthehugemanate 3y agoInteresting. Bing chat cites references... I wonder how different their implementation is?
- riedel 3y agoThe problem to me is rather, will also Bing and Google limit their bot to site indexing. IMHO it just does not make sense to use multiple bots, however, robots.txt gives no syntax afaik to limit purpose? This is particularly weird since the EU Datamining directive that got us into the mess inside the EU seems to suggest that robots.txt seems to be a valid means to retain copyright for data mining (there is no 'fair use' otherwise inside the EU). Are there other machine-readable standards? I further don't quite understand, how EU copyright relates to training a model outside the EU and using it within again (probably this is the biggest enforcement gap)
- Kiro 3y agoI have no problem letting anyone use my data when training their models, the same way I have no problem with commercial entities using my MIT licenced code.
- literalAardvark 3y agoChatgpt 4 provides pretty good citations on request.
- callalex 3y agoIt also keeps getting caught just blatantly making up citations that look good.
- literalAardvark 3y agoThat's mostly a problem with GPT3, not GPT4. I'm not saying it doesn't make some of them up, but I've had great research experiences with it. It's true that after you use the bot to fetch you the papers, you do still need to read them... but given what a dramatic difference there is between GPT3 and 4 I'd say this is a problem that will be utterly annihilated before most people even hear it exists.
- gfedtbyby 3y agoI don't think it's technically able to do that. It just tries to "guess" what the right source. It might get it right more often that not but that's not exactly what a citation is.
- gumballindie 3y agoThere’s little to no incentive. The issue we cant seem to be able to prevent openai from stealing content.
- JimDabell 3y ago> What’s the incentive for people to allow the crawler at all? So that LLMs can learn from it? Profit is not the only thing that motivates people. I’ve spent years contributing to Stack Overflow to help people solve their problems, with the understanding that they had an open data policy and anybody could access the data dump easily to build things with it. It pisses me off that they are now trying to lock that information away where LLMs can’t access it. The whole reason to contribute is to help people. Locking that information away instead of exploiting this new channel to help people more effectively is antithetical to the reason I contributed in the first place.
- terrytanys 3y agoThank you for your contribution! I think that has to be a strategic decision. If everyone start using ChatGPT for everything, what's the value now for SO? From their perspective, they wouldn't sit and watch it happens. And I would add citation is a big deal.
- agnosticmantis 3y agoBy the same token (no pun intended), locking up such data in a closed (in many senses) LLM wouldn’t be a desirable outcome?
- JimDabell 3y agoHow does an LLM learning from an open dataset lock it up?
- agnosticmantis 3y agoI meant the LLM weights are not publicly available in the case of ØpenAI, so whatever you contribute to it will be locked up, just like SO locked up their user-generated data.
- JimDabell 3y agoThese are two entirely different situations. With Stack Overflow, everybody contributed to their data set. This data set is centrally managed by Stack Overflow and access is whatever they choose to allow. When they block access to that data set, it effectively takes it away from the public. With OpenAI, they aren’t locking anything away. They are analysing the data and adjusting the weights in their model. They haven’t stopped people from accessing the data they are training upon. What Stack Overflow are doing is stopping the free flow of information. What OpenAI are doing is providing an additional channel for it to flow through.