How does that make it better?

It feels like you are making a computer program out to be more than it actually is right now. At the same time this all isn’t about what that program is doing. It’s about how it was built.

Well. When I copy and paste source code into my program and compile it it also doesn’t retain the actual code. It’s still not allowed.

If I on the other hand read source code, remember and reapply it in a sort of similar way later on then that’s totally fine. But that’s not what OpenAI did there. There wasn’t a human involved that read the articles and then used that knowledge to adjust the LLM.

There question i would have is where is the line there? Does that mean that as soon as there is some automated process that uses the data it’s fine?

E.g. could I have a script that reads all NYT articles, extracts interesting information and provides them in a different format to users?

But they aren’t forming take aways from it. They literally used that material to build this system. I also cannot just go around and take arbitrary data from anywhere and use it to build my own program. There are licenses attached to it and I have to be mindful of who’s work I can use to build my system and who’s I can’t use without explicit permission.

Building this system isn’t looking at other folks material and forming take aways from it. It’s literally using that material as input for building the system.

Might be a fundamental difference in opinion. I don’t see us anywhere near anything related to artificial life.

What they’ve built there is a product, a computer program and they used other folks data to build it without getting their permission. I also cannot go and just copy and paste source code from all over the internet to build my program. There are licenses attached to it that determine what you can or can’t do with it.

I feel like just because the term “learning” is involved people no longer view it as simply building or programming a system. Which it is.

But there is no one learning from it. It serves as a building block / source material to build these LLMs. I feel like the fact that it’s called learning gives folks the impression that it’s similar to what a human would do.

This comparison doesn’t make sense to me. If the person then makes money off it: yes.

Otherwise the question would be if copyright law should be abolished entirely. E.g. if I create a new news portal with content copied form other source, would that be okay then?

You are comparing a computer program to a human. Which… is weird.

Ah it will be at done point

And still it’s basically all Google.

Correction: FOSS Android Lemmy apps. It’s missing a few.

Super easy. Especially since this is all under their control. So they could simply write those messages elsewhere if they wanted to. I’m not saying they do, but it’s technically possible and a walk in the park.

I would generally trust such a company to do it right. But that doesn’t save you when law enforcement and such get involved.

Yes you should. Because it’s not e2e encrypted then.

No they didn’t? My company just recently introduced it.

I’m unsure of many people know that StackOverflow also had enterprise offerings. Our company has their own StackOverflow instance with very specific content to our tech stacks.

That depends on what you want. Folks where talking about a YouTube replacement. If TILVids is that for you right now and you don’t expect more content there then it’s all good.

Because what’s the point otherwise. Let’s just make a YouTube without videos. That will surely work.

That’s why you carry two sets of Airpods on a 12 hour flight. /s

Next problem is surge pricing and general ticket prices. I recall one city I was living in a few years back having advertisements for taking the train. And I was like “Yeah sure. It’s just double the price and triple the time”.

To me taking the train (at least for long distances) is a luxury thing.

Yeah. That feels more likely. Twitter has been running for years and likely isn’t a stranger to something like this.

Reddit is in the process of closing down their platform. It is very likely that google won’t be able to just crawl their website in the same manner as they did in the past. One of the reasons for the current effort of shutting down the API on Reddits side is that they want to prevent folks from extracting their data. This is what all other social media sites are doing as well. So there is a very high chance that Google won’t have access to it anymore.

Buying it would guarantee them this access and at the same time prevent their competitors from gaining it. After all Reddit is likely one of the most valuable sources for text based human interaction for training these networks.

Google also doesn’t care about tracking Reddit users by their ID. That isn’t where the values comes from.