3 ms·
I think this is a poor analogy. The better comparison would be if people were buying my apples and extracting the seeds to plant their own trees, then selling t
by firejake308 3y ago
I think this is a poor analogy. The better comparison would be if people were buying my apples and extracting the seeds to plant their own trees, then selling their own apples at a lower price than me and putting me out of business.
For example, I don't read Medium articles as often as I used to, in part because I can just ask my programming questions directly to ChatGPT. Granted, this is to be expected because ChatGPT can customize it's response based on my unique situation whereas the Medium article is fixed, but it's still unfair to the author of the Medium article that ChatGPT was trained on, because without their effort, none of this would have been possible. And yet, because I am no longer generating as revenue for Medium, the original authors are no longer being compensated for the value they provided me.
I personally believe that LLM hosts should be required to pay for training data. With RAG, I think it makes sense to charge per-query, but for base models, content authors would probably need to organize into larger groups to facilitate payment.
- satyrnein 3y agoYour apple analogy is completely legal and ethical. The alternative is Monsanto's attempt at DRM with their "terminator" seeds, which many found to be unethical.
- BlueTemplar 3y agoSadly, this is not even clear cut, though of course this is a particularly egregious example. For instance depending on jurisdiction it might be illegal to sell seeds that can make plants that can produce viable seeds, unless you have a specific authorisation and depending on the species.
- pixl97 3y agoLegality has nothing to do with ethical. I by force could make it a law that you have to pay me to eat, most reasonable people would consider that an affront to ethical behavior.
- BlueTemplar 3y agoOP said both. Also, you know that morality is relative, and laws basically represent polities' morals, right ?
- IMTDb 3y ago> I think this is a poor analogy. The better comparison would be if people were buying my apples and extracting the seeds to plant their own trees, then selling their own apples at a lower price than me and putting me out of business Thereby increasing the amount of apples available to the population, lowering prices, making them available to more people. A net gain for society as a whole. This happen all the time, you benefit from it all the time. You only have a problem with it because for once this system is not working in your direct favour.
- richbell 3y ago> A net gain for society as a whole. Perhaps at first. A race to the bottom usually results in everyone being worse-off though — see red delicious apples.
- pixl97 3y agoIt turns out people want pretty things, not 'good' things. It is very difficult to prevent this from occurring without other nasty side effects.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kelseyfrog 3y agoIt might also have a positive effect on artists themselves. See Jevon's Paradox on increasing efficiency of production increases demand.
- karmakaze 3y agoThe analogy seems fitting. The point is that the content was meant for direct rather than indirect consumption. My conclusion however is different--all are valid uses. Apples are what was sold, not a license for specific use of apples. It would be different if the content was posted on your own site with specific terms of service that prohibited specific uses. I don't think Reddit for example had anything like that in place when the data was scraped.