Readit NewsFew company can amass such quantities of knowledge and leverage it all for their own, very-private profits. This is unprecedented centralization of power, for a very select few. Do we actually want that? If not, why not block this until we're sure this a net positive for most people?
actually i think they are. lots of e-book slop
> If they start out-competing humans, is that bad?
Not inherently, but it depends on what you mean by out-competing. Social media outcompeted books and now everyone's addicted and mental illness is more rampant than ever. IMO, a net negative for society. AI books may very well win out through sheer spam but is that good for us?
It feels more like we just want to punish people, particularly rich people, particularly if they get away with stuff we're afraid to try.
Whether you can train your LLM on it is a very interesting question.
I've personally never been in favor of punishing people for downloading (or seeding) things.
Is it?
(I don't agree)
Yes, online bookstores are full of them:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/05/travel/amazon-guidebooks-...
The issue is there's an asymmetry between buyer/seller for books, because a buyer doesn't know the contents until you buy the book. Reviews can help, but not if the reviews are fake/AI generated. In this case, these books are profitable if only a few people buy them as the marginal cost of creating such a book is close to zero.
If you can't tell how the content is before you read it, it could be written by a monkey.
Or, just to follow it through, let's say "WidgetBoss LLC" makes a new Widget that every single human has to have, they become the biggest company ever by making one widget. What will you do to make them smaller? Why?
I have a big problem with Google & Meta, and I can understand arguments about those companies. But not just "big companies" as a generality.
But that's how everyone speaks now. "Literally every billionaire is evil and exploiting blah blah blah"