Technology

59148 readers

2310 users here now

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

Our Rules

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

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

289

Congress Wants Tech Companies to Pay Up for AI Training Data (www.wired.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

At a Senate hearing on AI’s impact on journalism, lawmakers backed media industry calls to make OpenAI and other tech companies pay to license news articles and other data used to train algorithms.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

And what about the authors whose works were injected without compensation? What should we do for them? I don't think that these commercial AI models should get to infringe on their copyrights for nothing. If I pay for a ChatGPT subscription and ask it to tell me about the war the Middle East and it basically regurgitates and plagiarizes information it learned from a journalist, then ChatGPT has essentially stolen the copyrighted work from that journalist and the revenue that my click would have earned them.

I don't see a problem using publicly posted copyrighted data for non-commercial use for training local language models but don't think its fair to allow copyright infringement for commercial use.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

You're repeating some talking points which are simply misinformation. An author who makes something "for hire", like an employed journalist, does not own the copyright. Do you believe that construction workers benefit when rents go up?

Copyrights are called intellectual property, because they work a lot like physical property. Employees create them and employers own them. They are bought and sold. A disproportionate share of property belongs to rich people, which is how they are rich.

This is about funneling more wealth to property owners. The idea that this would benefit anyone else is simply the good old trickle-down. It will not happen.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I think it's better be pragmatic then to give everything to the big corporations.

OpenAi isn't going to takes its tool offline so the loss of revenue isn't going away. Payments won't end up in the pockets of any individual journalist. The money the few journalistic sites will receive will be used to pay for the subscription fee to the next big model while cutting off their staff since it will net them more money.

If this goes through, Google and Microsoft will spend the next few years buying data or the companies that have it. The walls will be raised and we will be fucked, legislation will only help them.

And there is simply not enough public domain data to build a competitive product. Better to tax and redistribute through UBI while keeping the field competitive and avoiding monopolies imo.