weird how Chinese AI firms aren't saying this - but then, they don't have a massive fiscal crunch where they have to take delivery of trillions of dollars worth of contracted compute, that they haven't yet found a market for . . . .
https://www.groundbrkr.com/p/the-teaser-period-why-the-ai-boom
If I didn't know better, I'd think they were trying to angle for a bailout!
I honestly don't see a point where we can move past this without Sam altman, nadell, musk, etc all facing mandatory life time sentence without parole, work release etc.
I would also accept the removal of their heads.
I'd prefer if they were forced to pay royalties for all the work they stole to the people they stole it from. And, like, have someone actually force them to comply. They'd have to hire a Microsoft-sized compliance department just to figure this shit out and track payments.
Yeah, but with which money? All those AI companies are not and will never be profitable (and they'll be the reason for the next stock market bubble pop)
Which is exactly why they are pivoting to "AI sucks, LLMs are dangerous..."
Better yet, seize their assets and make them try to make a go at it as a regular person.
Seize their assets and use that to pay creators whose works they stole.
“Our AI content strategy has started a ‘doom loop’ that will hurt the performance of our models and the entire web at the same time: It is highly unusual that an end-product threatens the economic foundations of its essential suppliers, but that is the situation we have created for our LLM business with respect to its ‘content supply chain,’” the document said.
Microsoft executives, including CEO Satya Nadella, testified under oath that after ripping content from the New York Times and other news sites, clicks to those news sites fully cratered, falling by more than 90 percent on Bing.
Documents obtained during the court proceedings found that OpenAI created “a hack to get around nytimes paywall,” to which OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman said “ah, nice.” Microsoft executive Brent Hecht wrote that LLMs steal content “without ways of distributing economic value down the supply chain, [which] necessarily threatens the economic stability of those who create the content.”
Fuck these guys.
So the admission of intentionally circumventing the NYT paywall is where this becomes a real actual IP infringement issue for them. From a legal perspective, that is literally as crazy a thing to come out in discovery as Anthropic's torrenting an enormous chunk of their training corpus. These are IP infringements, totally irrespective their use in training GPTs. I cannot imagine having to represent these idiots.
That's because, thus far, they get away with choosing not to distribute any of their trillions of dollars to the suppliers of the information they consume - money has only gone to the suppliers of hardware and power, and to influencing politicians and rewarding investors. That's their choice, and they should not be allowed to continue to make that choice. Good luck to the NYT.
We've known since the late 1800's that the end game of capitalism is to automate all labor.
someone should write a book about how capitalism functions. Call it like The Capital or something.
That's kind of the funniest part in fact: these companies are destroying their own viable business segments. Bing was a huge growth driver for Microsoft. Less clicks is bad for them. They make more money on Bing ads than they do on LLMs. Same with Google.
Reddit is getting crushed atm after it sold access to its data to train models. Chat bots make visiting these websites pointless, without replacing that traffic with anything they can meaningfully monetize.
The more popular Gemini is, the less money Google will make. The market has already shown how much people are willing to pay for Ai subscriptions, and it isn't all that much. None of these companies have found a way to make ads viable in LLMs either. They are beyond self sabotaging themselves at this point. It really is a doom loop.
Internet search is terrible now. Every website I go to reads like it was generated by an LLM.
Because it was generated by a llm.
I did a search for the torque spec on a castle nut last week and the second result was for a nut (as in, food nuts that you eat) website and the llm had gone all in on nuts and added a page about castle nuts. It even generated an image of a castle for the top because... castle nut.
It proceeded to provide vague instructions and a torque recommendation of 2x the actual spec.
Then there was the other one about a small 4 stroke engine where it stated "other sites will say you don't need to mix oil with gas but you absolutely must!" (You don't and shouldn't) ... I wonder how many people have fucked up their shit by trusting llm garbage without knowing better.
Running into this same problem but with parenting. My wife is constantly asking me to "Google if it's good/bad if our baby is doing" X. And I'll find 20 slopposts from dozens of "parenting" websites that all give conflicting answers. This week, I asked my parents for their copy of Dr. Spock's Baby and Childcare because we need some solid reference. Sorry kiddo, you're going to get raised like it's 1987 because 2026 sucks.
Just give the baby a cigarette. It lubricates the lungs.
Plus they'll look sick af
Glad I spent my teens and 20s getting stoned and reading the shit out of wikipedia before this shit happened. Can't trust anything written online now.
At least Wikipedia has sources cited.
Before AI it was SEO blogspam. Now they’ve just cut the human out.
The best succinct description of llm that I've read was "plagiarism machine", because that's basically what they are: automated plagiarism. At best they create a collage of other works, at worst they copy one work verbatim, but they never create something original because they can't.
Copying something is a lot easier and thus cheaper than creating an original work from scratch, so genuine creators cannot hope to compete on cost. Which leads to less people being able to afford to earn a living from creating works, which leads to less original works being created.
Short term that's great for the neoliberal company executives: fire the expensive artists, create cheap slop with the plagiarism machine, and thus maximize profits now. That the plagiarism machine becomes stagnant because not enough new original works are being created is a future problem, by which time the current executives will have already jumped ship.
But while it's great for the neoliberal business model, for the rest of society it will suck. So now that we have confirmation that the AI executives know how bad their products are, and that they were just publicly lying about it in the style of tobacco executives, will anything be done about this "astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions"? Personally I doubt it, there's too much regulatory capture.
Which leads to less people being able to afford to earn a living from creating works, which leads to less original works being created.
It's why the only solution for AI is socialism.
It breaks every profit model and the wage form otherwise.
don't base your thoughts on the plagiarism machine that can't create anything new because that idea isn't correct
They knew what they were doing every step of the way. They are criminals that need to be disarmed and locked away. And we need to create a new Internet from scratch somehow thanks to these donkeys.
If we make a new internet from scratch can we get rid of JavaScript too while we’re at it?
Relax guys, the very stable high IQ president of the united states will protect you. No meed for guardrails or regulations.
God the guardrails things. These stupid companies are all hyping up "We need to slow down, we need guard rails!"
Ok.
No one is fucking stopping you. Just... Slow yourself down, guardrail yourself.
Oh wait, it's just an excuse to create regulatory capture.
It's the theftbot manufacturers trying to have excuses in the public perception for why all their claims about their product don't ever happen.
"We had to slow down for safety. All those things we promised are coming, just one more round of funding bro."
Microsoft, in a policy document, wrote that generative AI could “significantly disrupt the employment of the very people who generated the data on which the foundation model was trained […] LLMs are a product that destroys its supply chain.”
If that’s not the very definition of a categorically unsustainable business model, I don’t know what the fuck is.
They don't care. They want all the money this quarter.
Gonna get real weird soon when they run out of rich new training data and they begin to consume their own shit. When that happens their entire model will collapse and if the bubble hasn't popped already that may be what causes it.
They're already doing it. They call it distilling when they take it from another llm. Pretty sure most content was already stolen in the early days and they now rely on distillation and stealing new content.
"I am sitting in a room"
and nothing changed.
“Our AI content strategy has started a ‘doom loop’ that will hurt the performance of our models and the entire web at the same time: It is highly unusual that an end-product threatens the economic foundations of its essential suppliers, but that is the situation we have created for our LLM business with respect to its ‘content supply chain,’” the document said.
So basically the ouroboros
NGL, I was kinda hoping something would destroy the internet and we could move to Reticulum/NomadNet/I2P/Tor
Shit's been going downhill since 1999
Setting up a Reticulum node this week.
And wondering if there's a matrix client that can use it, or if that's something that needs to be made . . .
They're very different.
You could try to do some kind of bridge server side or just add straight up identity/send/receive client side. You need RNSD running somewhere to hook.
Yeah, I'm just thinking that having chat rooms, etc, that cannot be shut down because they're on Reticulum could be a very nice thing to have
The transport layer isn’t the issue.
LLMs are NOT destroying the planet. It's the humans running the companies making LLMs.
Okay, the let's destroy the humans running the companies making LLMs before they destroy us. Fetch the guillotines!
Actually surprised how candid some of these statements are. Maybe points to more internal resistance than I would have assumed... like, they see the problem.
Their focus on threats to media companies is probably borne out of fear of litigation, so maybe they only pay a lil lip service to how they also hurt "content creators" (people).
Could also be that they know that when talking to the representatives of runaway financial automatons like multinational corporations, they have to appeal in terms the machine will understand.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
