[cmrdporcupine]

Another day, another person on HN showing us how they don't understand the difference between Public Domain and Open Source or Copyleft etc.

And regardless -- the problem now is that expectations of how content can be consumed are now fundamentally violated by automation of content ingestion. People put stuff up on the Internet with the expectation of its consumption by human minds, which have inherent limitations on the speed and scale on which they can learn from and reproduce things, and those humans are also legally liable, socially/ethically obligated, etc.

Now we have machines which skirt the limits of legality, and are able to do so on massive scale and without responsibility to society as a whole.

Different game now.

[scarface_74]

> People put stuff up on the Internet with the expectation of its consumption by human minds

Then people obviously aren’t aware that bots have been indexing web pages and showing summarized information without going to the web page for three decades.

[cmrdporcupine]

I think it's a bit intellectually dishonest to claim an equivalence between content indexing for search engines and machine learning for LLMs. They might share an underlying harvesting technique, but their uses -- indexing for information accessibility vs automatic content production are qualitatively different.

Further, almost every site has had an e.g. robots.txt which has permitted content harvesting only for certain accepted purposes for a couple decades now. So clearly people already had a sense of how they wanted their content harvested and for what purposes.

[scarface_74]

How is it not content production when I search for something on Google and get a box with similar questions and summarizes the answer.

So you’re okay with Google making money off of your content. But not OpenAI?