Every time I see a deal like this between a publishing company that’s previously been outspoken against AI and an AI company, all I can think is “Oh, so you aren’t against AI, you just said that...
Every time I see a deal like this between a publishing company that’s previously been outspoken against AI and an AI company, all I can think is “Oh, so you aren’t against AI, you just said that until you got paid.”
Joking aside, people should be paid for their use of their work. In a just world, the reporters would get paid for having their work scraped - even better, offer an opt out option - not The NY Times.
Hasn't that always been the commercial publisher argument against AI? That the AI providers didn't pay for rights so are basically pirating the content.
Hasn't that always been the commercial publisher argument against AI? That the AI providers didn't pay for rights so are basically pirating the content.
Every time I see a deal like this between a publishing company that’s previously been outspoken against AI and an AI company, all I can think is “Oh, so you aren’t against AI, you just said that until you got paid.”
Joking aside, people should be paid for their use of their work. In a just world, the reporters would get paid for having their work scraped - even better, offer an opt out option - not The NY Times.
Hasn't that always been the commercial publisher argument against AI? That the AI providers didn't pay for rights so are basically pirating the content.