“And once valuable open source knowledge will increasingly live behind closed doors.”
Legally, books are behind closed doors. Buying the book doesn’t permit you to do to its contents what AI companies have done. But the AI companies have done it and got away with it. What will happen with Tailwind’s products once you have to pay?
Fair enough. If LLMs are charging users, then the human expertise (the data generated by experts) that these models rely on for their optimisation should also be remunerated. As Mark Schmidt puts it, “You will have to pay to use my library in the future,” which means LLM engineers will still be able to access rich content, through paid subscriptions. This will inevitably widen inequities in access to technology for those who cannot afford it. Ultimately, it is the disadvantaged who will be deprived of access to advancement and technology. That said, even those benevolent minds with the pure intention of making technology/service accessible to ordinary people cannot continue to provide free labour simply to make tech bros richer.
So what's the solution? This reminds me of the fable The Mice in Council. Mice are discussing the problem of a marauding cat and debating what to do about it. The one solution they come up with--belling the cat--is impractical as no mouse will volunteer to try that. What then?
“And once valuable open source knowledge will increasingly live behind closed doors.”
Legally, books are behind closed doors. Buying the book doesn’t permit you to do to its contents what AI companies have done. But the AI companies have done it and got away with it. What will happen with Tailwind’s products once you have to pay?
Adam, thank you! these are all valuable resources that I did not even know before your introduction. It's quite frustrating.
Fair enough. If LLMs are charging users, then the human expertise (the data generated by experts) that these models rely on for their optimisation should also be remunerated. As Mark Schmidt puts it, “You will have to pay to use my library in the future,” which means LLM engineers will still be able to access rich content, through paid subscriptions. This will inevitably widen inequities in access to technology for those who cannot afford it. Ultimately, it is the disadvantaged who will be deprived of access to advancement and technology. That said, even those benevolent minds with the pure intention of making technology/service accessible to ordinary people cannot continue to provide free labour simply to make tech bros richer.
So what's the solution? This reminds me of the fable The Mice in Council. Mice are discussing the problem of a marauding cat and debating what to do about it. The one solution they come up with--belling the cat--is impractical as no mouse will volunteer to try that. What then?