[jstummbillig]

This benefits actually everyone.

If our combined creative work until this point is what turns out to be necessary to kick-start a great shot at abundance (and if you do not believe that, if it's all for nothing, why care at all about the money wasted on models?) it might simply be our societal moral obligation to endorse it -- just as is will be the model creators moral obligation to uphold their end of this deal.

Interestingly, Andrej Karpathy recently described the data we are debating as more or less undesirable to build a better LLM and accidentally good enough to have made it work so far (https://youtu.be/hM_h0UA7upI?t=1045). We'll see about that.

[Guvante]

I want to see any indication that abundance form AI would benefit man kind first.

While I would love Star Trek society has been going very much towards Cyberpunk aesthetic aka "the rich hold all the power".

To be precise AI models fundamentally need content to survive but they need so much content there is no price that makes sense.

Allowing AI to monetize without enriching the people who allowed it to exist isn't a good path forward.

And to be clear I do not believe there is a fundamental rift here. Shorten copyright to something reasonable like 20 years and in a decade AI will have access to all of the data it needs guilt free.

[dyauspitr]

There are glimpses. Getting a high score on an Olympiad means there is the possibility of being able to autonomously solve very difficult problems in the future.