10

Which of the following sounds more reasonable?

  • I shouldn't have to pay for the content that I use to tune my LLM model and algorithm.

  • We shouldn't have to pay for the content we use to train and teach an AI.

By calling it AI, the corporations are able to advocate for a position that's blatantly pro corporate and anti writer/artist, and trick people into supporting it under the guise of a technological development.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The funniest thing I've seen on this is the ChatGPT CEO, Altman, talking about how he's a bit afraid of what they've created and how it needs limitations -- and then when the EU begins to look at regulations, he immediately rejects the concept, to the point of threatening to leave the European market. It's incredibly transparent what they're doing.

Unfortunately I don't know enough about the technology to say if the algorithms and concepts themselves are novel, but without a doubt they couldn't exist without modern computing power capabilities.

[-] FancyGUI@lemmy.fancywhale.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I can tell for a fact that there's nothing new going on. Only the MASSIVE investment from Microsoft to allow them to train on an insane amount of data. I am no "expert" per se, but I've been studying and working with AI for over a decade - so feel free to judge my reply as you please

[-] Peruvian_Skies@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

The concepts themselves are some 30 years old, but storage capacity and processing speed have only recently reached a point where generative AI outperforms competing solutions.

But regarding the regulation thing, I don't know what was said or proposed, and this is just me playing devil's advocate: but could it be that the CEO simply doesn't agree with the specifics of the proposed regulations while still believing that some other, different kind of regulation should exist?

[-] rainh@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Certainly could be, but probably an optimistic take. Most likely they're just trying to do what corporations have been doing for ages, which is to weaponize government policy to prevent competition. They don't want restrictions that will materially impact their product, they want restrictions that will materially impact startups to make it more difficult for them to intrude on the established space.

[-] jumperalex@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I think if you fed your response into ChatGPT and asked it to summarize in two words it would return,

"Regulatory Capture"

[-] MxM111@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

And what are they doing? To remind, OpenAI is non-profit.

[-] Starfarer@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

I thought they moved to for profit back in 2019?

[-] MxM111@kbin.social -2 points 1 year ago
[-] BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

They're a non-profit managed by a for-profit, who's received most of their funding from another for-proft.

this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
10 points (81.2% liked)

Technology

58160 readers
4229 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS