3 ms·
I don't get the confusion. He's saying that (i) they will need to start charging money per generation (ii) they will share some of this money with rightsholder
by sebzim4500 1y ago
I don't get the confusion. He's saying that
(i) they will need to start charging money per generation
(ii) they will share some of this money with rightsholders
- samastur 1y agothey will TRY to share this money ;)
- cedilla 1y agoYes – "with rightsholders who want their characters generated by users. " So it's not about reimbursing "rightsholders" they rip off. It's about giving a pittance to those who allow them to continue to do so. Sorry, trying to give a pittance to them.
- basisword 1y agoThey will share the money with the rights holders large enough to sue them. Fuck the rest. Just as they’ve done with training material for ChatGPT.
- solid_fuel 1y agoIt's confusing to me because charging money is implied - "we are going to have to somehow make money" - but not actually stated, and then it jumps past the revenue structure into sharing money with "rightsholders". It has left me wondering if, instead of just charging users, they would start charging "rightsholders" for IP protection. I could see a system where e.g. Disney pays OpenAI $1 million up front to train in recognition of Mickey Mouse, and then receives a revenue share back from users who generate videos containing Mickey Mouse.