this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
1716 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
2838 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0oWow@lemmy.world -2 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Anyone care to explain why people would care that they posted to a public forum that they don't own, with content that is now further being shared for public benefit?

The argument that it's your content becomes false as soon as you shared it with the world.

[–] TheOneCurly@lemm.ee 44 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I can only really speak to reddit, but I think this applies to all of the user generated content websites. The original premise, that everyone agreed to, was the site provides a space and some tools and users provide content to fill it. As information gets added, it becomes a valuable resource for everyone. Ads and other revenue streams become a necessary evil in all this, but overall directly support the core use case.

Now that content is being packaged into large language models to be either put behind a paywall or packed into other non-freely available services. Since they no longer seem interested in supporting the model we all agreed on, I see no reason to continue adding value and since they provided tools to remove content I may as well use them.

[–] 0oWow@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But from the very beginning years ago, it was understood that when you post on these types of sites, the data is not yours, or at least you give them license to use it how they see fit. So for years people accepted that, but are now whining because they aren't getting paid for something they gave away.

[–] TheOneCurly@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

This is legal vs rude. It certainly is legal and was in the terms of service for them to use the data in any way they see fit. But, also it's rude to bait and switch from being a message board to being an AI data source company. Users we led to believe they were entering into an agreement with one type of company and are now in an agreement with a totally different one.

You can smugly tell people they shouldn't have made that decision 15 years ago when they started, but a little empathy is also cool.

Additionally: When you owe your entire existence and value to user goodwill it might not be a great idea to be rude to them.

[–] Emotet@slrpnk.net 37 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's not shared for public benefit, though. OpenAI, despite the Open in their name, charges for access to their models. You either pay with money or (meta)data, depending on the model.

Legally, sure. You signed away your rights to your answers when you joined the forum. Morally, though?

People are pissed that SO, that was actively encouraging Mods to use AI detection software to prevent any LLM usage in the posted questions and answers, are now selling the publicly accessible data, made by their users for free, to a closed-source for-profit entity that refuses to open itself up.

Basically the same story as with reddit.

[–] golli@lemm.ee 11 points 6 months ago

Agreed. As you said it's a similar situation as with reddit, where I decided to delete my comments.

My reasoning is that those contributions were given under the premise that everybody was sharing to help each other.

Now that premise has changed: the large tech companies are only taking and the platform providers are changing the rules aswell to profit from it.

So as a result I packed my things and left, in case of reddit to here.

That said I think both views are valid and I wouldn't fault those that think differently.

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Lol it ain't for public benefit unless it's a FOSS model with which I'd have no issue

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip -3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well no, when you post something it is public and out of your control

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

No, you can't post something in public and have it appropriated by a mega corp for money and then prevent you from deleting or modifying the very things you posted.

I'm pro-AI btw. But AI for all.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip -1 points 6 months ago

You agreed to it

[–] gencha@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago

It is your content. But SE specifically only accepts CC licensed content, which makes you right.