|
|
|
|
|
by ethanbond
907 days ago
|
|
I’ll restate it for clarity: I like high-quality information. Producing and publishing high-quality information is not free. There are ways to make it free to the consumer, yes. One way is charity (Wikipedia) and another way is advertising. Neither is free to produce; the advertising incentive is also nuked by LLMs; and I’m not comfortable depending on charity for all of my information. It is a lot cheaper to produce low-quality than high-quality information. This is doubly so in a world of LLMs. There is ONE Wikipedia, and it is surely one of mankind’s crowning achievements. You’re pointing to that to say, “see look, it’s possible!”? |
|
I contribute to Wikipedia, and I don't consider my contributions to be "charity"; I contribute because I enjoy it. Even in the age of printing presses, copyright law was widely ignored, well into the 20thC. The USA didn't join the Berne Convention until 1989 (and they promptly went mad with copyright).
Yes, there's only one Wikipedia; but there are lots of copies, and lots of similar efforts. Yes, there's one Wikipedia, like there's one Mona Lisa. There are lots of things of which there's only one; in that sense, Wikipedia isn't remotely unique.