2 ms·
None of the companies you mentioned are owned by a private AI company, except X. I can't think of any other example of an AI company owning it's own social net
by saltysalt 2y ago
None of the companies you mentioned are owned by a private AI company, except X.
I can't think of any other example of an AI company owning it's own social network, it's a fresh precedent.
- maxlin 2y agoThat is irrelevant to the invalidity of your original statement. LLM's clearly don't have problems having their training data scraped from all those mentioned irregardless of their ownership.
- saltysalt 2y agoMy original statement was from the perspective of the users, not the LLMs. Perfectly valid to empathize with them.
- maxlin 2y agoNo it isn't ok to patronize X users with a false precedent. X and Grok work very well together, one can ask questions and get relevant, and RECENT posts by X users answering that query, something other LLM's can't really do. Content created by X users is for X users to find either through their feed, basic search, or Grok. There's no foul play here, and how Grok uses data on X is not hard to defend even from a basic "better search" angle. Your "emphatize" comment sounds like "will someone think of the african children" kind of detached waste of breath, something the Chinese call "Baizuo".
- saltysalt 2y agoIt's not patronizing, it's a statement of fact: X is the only social network owned by an AI company (xAI), that only has one product (Grok) that is trained by data from X, which is user-generated data. Now, you may not like that, but it's still real.