pull down to refresh
188 sats \ 1 reply \ @TheBTCManual 27 Dec 2023 \ on: New York Times Sues OpenAI & Microsoft AI
LLMs are useful for sifting through large data sets and digesting content and its definitely driving up zero-click searches, which Google and Bing were already doing by giving instant answers, reducing the chance of click-through to sites that could earn revenue from ads or paid subs so I get the gripe, but how will this end?
Content can live without LLMs, LLMs can't live without content and now creators of that content want a piece of the pie.
Do LLM companies just settle with the big guys and set up sweetheart deals like search engines and social media have done, and forget about the little guy? To me the obvious answer would be revenue share via the Lightning network, but that sure is not going to happen, so interested to see what borked solution they propose, if anything
I don't think LLMs have really found a real business model and path to sustainable monetisation yet, so how will they factor in revenue shares?
just settle with the big guys and set up sweetheart deals like search engines and social media have done
Yeah, maybe a spotify-style arrangement where some consortium of copyright holders receive some tiny revenue-share for each search that touches their content.
Or alternatively, perhaps MSFT just agrees to fork over a one-time payment as a "training use" license.
Having said all that I think NYT probably bit players here....the rumor is that OpenAI utilized libgen (pirate book site) and downloaded hundreds of thousands of ebooks as corpus data. So likely these lawsuits are just the beginning and its going to get messier before it gets clearer....
reply