4 ms·

> Therefore, there will be no more incentive to create those types of sites. There will also be no more incentive to create sites with actual useful informatio

> Therefore, there will be no more incentive to create those types of sites. There will also be no more incentive to create sites with actual useful information since AI will just appropriate it. AI will destroy the source of its training data.

ramraj07 3y ago
The sites with actual useful information don’t need much effort to create and maintain. If it was all just wikis it’s perfectly great. The problem only became when “entrepreneurs” realized they can game this system to gain money.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  The sites with actually useful information don't care about AI anyway. There's no way in which LLM being trained or used on them hurts them - if anything, it helps the information become more widely available (which is the goal of such sites anyway). If anything, this reduces the load on the site and expense of hosting it - which is a good thing. Such sites would only be hurt if they somehow derived benefit from marginal reader visiting their site - but this doesn't apply to sites with quality, trustworthy information, as the only such benefits you can get is either ego stroking or earning money by subjecting the visitor to some kind of abuse. For sites doing that, if AI kills them, I call good riddance.
- onion2k 3y ago
  I'm struggling to think of a site I use regularly that could function without either adverts or someone else (businesses, donations, or the site owner) putting money to fund it, and I honestly can't think of one. The modern internet just wouldn't function if we took entrepreneurship out of it.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    Someone has to put some money into everything, but the number can be low enough to be entirely donations. > The modern internet just wouldn't function if we took entrepreneurship out of it. I think the modern internet is specifically what we're all upset about here? That the "entrepreneurship" isn't the grand visions of spaceships and androids and electric driverless cars of Musk, it's not the "app for that" of Jobs, it's not "connecting the world" (who even said that, Zuckerberg?), it's not "organising the world's information" like early Google… it's cramming as many ads as possible into someone's field of view at all times like the villain in Ready Player One.
  - ramraj07 3y ago
    Almost Every single useful site I use is not powered by business. It’s either government funded or donation based.
  - carlosjobim 3y ago
    Better than ads, sites can make money by selling products and services. A website with information on gardening, that also sells the equipment and seeds you need. A website with travel information that also sells tours. A website with any programming and IT information that also sells software. These kind of sites make much better money than ad and affiliate sites, but people haven't understood it yet. The online ad industry – especially on social media – is a huge scam. Small and medium size businesses can't resist throwing in some bucks in the ad casino, and Facebook will tell them they had so many thousands of impressions, funny that it didn't turn into any sales? Online ads are also very comfortable and easy for some worthless manager who has a set advertising budget. Just throw away the money into social media ads instead of thinking through a campaign.
    - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
      > Better than ads, sites can make money by selling products and services. A website with information on gardening, that also sells the equipment and seeds you need. A website with travel information that also sells tours. A website with any programming and IT information that also sells software. That would compromise the neutrality of the site. Also not everyone who want to publish information about stuff wants to run a freaking retail business to support the publishing/hosting.
      - carlosjobim 3y ago
        > That would compromise the neutrality of the site. So what? Competitors exist also. Brick and mortar stores exist and nobody complains that they aren't "neutral". > Also not everyone who want to publish information about stuff wants to run a freaking retail business to support the publishing/hosting. They can continue then with their garbage ads, if they so please. But for those who aim to make more money than paying for their hosting, I think selling some product or service is better for their bottom line and for the web at large, than relying on ads. Strictly talking about people who publish online with the goal of making money.
tomjen3 3y ago
Wikipedia is not going to stop. Your local cinema is not going to stop posting movies and show times on their website. The only sites that are going to be hit by this are those that make money on ads.
- onion2k 3y ago
  My local cinema doesn't have a website. It uses social media instead.
- TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
  Wikipedia doesn't cover everything. > The only sites that are going to be hit by this are those that make money on ads. There are plenty of those and they do provide value - else they won't have been able to survive all these years via ads.
  - tomjen3 3y ago
    There are plenty of sites, but would you rather follow a link to one of them, or to a personal blog with info about the same thing?
    - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
      > would you rather follow a link to one of them, or to a personal blog with info about the same thing? Either one is OK frankly, as long as I get the information I need. Depending on my confidence level in the accuracy of the information on those sites, I might even visit both to compare and contrast. Regardless, both are unlikely to survive without ads. Most people don't run their own web server to host a blog - most people don't know, and don't want to know, how. Even if hosting isn't a problem for blogs, I think the amount of blogging will drop. Who would want spend a week crafting a blog detailing their experiences with something and what they have learned then get next to no views because some AI appropriated their content and stole all your viewers? With few visitors, probably just search engine and AI crawlers, and no comments on their blog posts ... it's hard not to feel that it's just a wasting time.

ramraj07 3y ago

The sites with actual useful information don’t need much effort to create and maintain. If it was all just wikis it’s perfectly great. The problem only became when “entrepreneurs” realized they can game this system to gain money.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
The sites with actually useful information don't care about AI anyway. There's no way in which LLM being trained or used on them hurts them - if anything, it helps the information become more widely available (which is the goal of such sites anyway). If anything, this reduces the load on the site and expense of hosting it - which is a good thing. Such sites would only be hurt if they somehow derived benefit from marginal reader visiting their site - but this doesn't apply to sites with quality, trustworthy information, as the only such benefits you can get is either ego stroking or earning money by subjecting the visitor to some kind of abuse. For sites doing that, if AI kills them, I call good riddance.
onion2k 3y ago
I'm struggling to think of a site I use regularly that could function without either adverts or someone else (businesses, donations, or the site owner) putting money to fund it, and I honestly can't think of one. The modern internet just wouldn't function if we took entrepreneurship out of it.
- ben_w 3y ago
  Someone has to put some money into everything, but the number can be low enough to be entirely donations. > The modern internet just wouldn't function if we took entrepreneurship out of it. I think the modern internet is specifically what we're all upset about here? That the "entrepreneurship" isn't the grand visions of spaceships and androids and electric driverless cars of Musk, it's not the "app for that" of Jobs, it's not "connecting the world" (who even said that, Zuckerberg?), it's not "organising the world's information" like early Google… it's cramming as many ads as possible into someone's field of view at all times like the villain in Ready Player One.
- ramraj07 3y ago
  Almost Every single useful site I use is not powered by business. It’s either government funded or donation based.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  Better than ads, sites can make money by selling products and services. A website with information on gardening, that also sells the equipment and seeds you need. A website with travel information that also sells tours. A website with any programming and IT information that also sells software. These kind of sites make much better money than ad and affiliate sites, but people haven't understood it yet. The online ad industry – especially on social media – is a huge scam. Small and medium size businesses can't resist throwing in some bucks in the ad casino, and Facebook will tell them they had so many thousands of impressions, funny that it didn't turn into any sales? Online ads are also very comfortable and easy for some worthless manager who has a set advertising budget. Just throw away the money into social media ads instead of thinking through a campaign.
  - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
    > Better than ads, sites can make money by selling products and services. A website with information on gardening, that also sells the equipment and seeds you need. A website with travel information that also sells tours. A website with any programming and IT information that also sells software. That would compromise the neutrality of the site. Also not everyone who want to publish information about stuff wants to run a freaking retail business to support the publishing/hosting.
    - carlosjobim 3y ago
      > That would compromise the neutrality of the site. So what? Competitors exist also. Brick and mortar stores exist and nobody complains that they aren't "neutral". > Also not everyone who want to publish information about stuff wants to run a freaking retail business to support the publishing/hosting. They can continue then with their garbage ads, if they so please. But for those who aim to make more money than paying for their hosting, I think selling some product or service is better for their bottom line and for the web at large, than relying on ads. Strictly talking about people who publish online with the goal of making money.

tomjen3 3y ago

Wikipedia is not going to stop. Your local cinema is not going to stop posting movies and show times on their website. The only sites that are going to be hit by this are those that make money on ads.

onion2k 3y ago
My local cinema doesn't have a website. It uses social media instead.
TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
Wikipedia doesn't cover everything. > The only sites that are going to be hit by this are those that make money on ads. There are plenty of those and they do provide value - else they won't have been able to survive all these years via ads.
- tomjen3 3y ago
  There are plenty of sites, but would you rather follow a link to one of them, or to a personal blog with info about the same thing?
  - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
    > would you rather follow a link to one of them, or to a personal blog with info about the same thing? Either one is OK frankly, as long as I get the information I need. Depending on my confidence level in the accuracy of the information on those sites, I might even visit both to compare and contrast. Regardless, both are unlikely to survive without ads. Most people don't run their own web server to host a blog - most people don't know, and don't want to know, how. Even if hosting isn't a problem for blogs, I think the amount of blogging will drop. Who would want spend a week crafting a blog detailing their experiences with something and what they have learned then get next to no views because some AI appropriated their content and stole all your viewers? With few visitors, probably just search engine and AI crawlers, and no comments on their blog posts ... it's hard not to feel that it's just a wasting time.