|
|
|
|
|
by brookst
1134 days ago
|
|
Counterpoint: 1. Humans were generating massive amounts of false information that Google couldn't keep up with, years before Openai appeared. 2. The people who stand to lose the most are those whose jobs are replaceable: information workers. I cringe hearing "but this is different than the industrial revolution and government needs to protect me". 3. If Openai "stole" publicly posted content, then so does Google, and so does every human who reads anything online. 4. You may be right about brakes. Revolutions that displaced factory workers, taxi drivers, typists -- those were all well and good. But threaten the moneyed class and suddenly we're seeing so-called libertarians (not you, I mean like Musk) calling for regulation. |
|
Why should things have human rights and privileges then ? I really don't know the solution to the emerging issues we face here, but I read the same "like a human" argument over and over and I can't really help but notice that LLM's are NOT human. We deny a lot of human rights to primate animals but should immediately accept the human-likeness of LLM's ?
"If Openai "stole" publicly posted content, then so does Google"
This also makes a lot of assumptions which I think we shouldn't make just yet. That's because if we equate LLM's with a search engine then the argument of plagiarism makes a lot more sense. At least google leads to the original content.