My job is so bad it doesnt want it.

I think I have one with a cracked screen lying around somewhere

Make offer

Factory sealed ** you can get any old one for a couple bucks but if she’s unopened… that makes her a collector’s item. And people have spent much more than 60k on collection hobbies.

I get what you are saying, but the title is not "10x the original value". It's "10x the original price" and it is in fact 10x the price. You have done a good job showing that it's not 10x the value though.

Exactly. This is what big tech has been doing already to create legal and ethical data.

The training data is the bottleneck. OpenAI is trying to see if they can pull a fast one by releasing models using copyrighted material

What an insane guy, creating a new revenue stream that ONLY around 100,000 people are paying.

People can do whatever they want with copyright privately. It's when you release the work or try to commercialize it that causes the problems. Nothing is stopping AI companies from scraping and training all day. In order to release it, they should compensate the copyright holders

Laugh. Out. Loud.

Sure, but you don’t charge the audience. It’s a voluntary fee that you only pay if you want a verified ID.

Why not? Just say scraping is fine for research and private models. As soon as you release it to the public or try to monetize it, then it's outside of fair use. Just like Nintendo, when they go after passion project games that are similar in theme, style, and mechanics. You can't just take other people's work and make money off of it

I feel like this should be on r/ABoringDystopia for some reason.

Also, the opportunity cost of not doing something else with that money.

Unlikely they would have found a better use for the money with a higher ROI, though

“Facebook is free and always will be” 🙄

> if you work from home, yes it’s coming for you

No, this is far oversimplified. If your job requires a ton of negotiation and coordination between stakeholders and clarification of requirements, AI that can do that is a long way off. You will have new tools to make parts of your job easier, but by the time AI comes for those jobs, you’re looking at a radically different situation where your career is the least of your worries.

> If it takes less than a week to learn your job duties, you’re done.

When you count the years you spent as a child learning manual dexterity, almost no jobs fit into this category. Easy for humans is not the same as easy for machines. See Moravec’s paradox

People are still using Facebook?

[deleted]

Wow that's nothing! In my country inflation has grown 94% since 2007

[removed]

Yeah if you don’t know, maybe don’t make some broad generalization and ignorant statement about “culture”of 1.6 billion people.

Tl;dr that iPhone would have had to sell for $86k to be 100x the price of what it was in 2007.

$10 today isn’t 10x $1 from 2007. Money is worth less now due to inflation. A $600 iPhone in 2007 corrected for inflation today is $865.

Another way to look at it is if you put $100 in a safe in 2007 and you pull it out now, it’s still $100 but worth a lot less than it was back then, only $69 in today’s money when buying an item that also corrected for inflation. So if a widget costs you $100 today, if it followed the same inflation, it would have cost $69 in 2007, but you still had $100 bill back then. Today that money has lost value so it takes the whole $100 to buy that widget.

Edit: well since I’m on the downvote train, I don’t guess there’s much I can do at this point but I did want to clarify that i meant this in the context of reselling an item for a profit. People will read this and say “they made 100x!” and I was showing why that’s not the case. All the time people get mad at the price of something in the past compared to now and that’s because they aren’t correcting for inflation. Sure, as the other guy pointed out price vs value, but that’s not what I’m talking about here. I’m actually talking about price, that price was in a different currency, it was in 2007USD which is not the same as today. I know we are talking about a headline and yes it’s fun to see “100x”, I just wanted to add some economics in there as well.

Edit2: removed the superfluous first line and fixed the 10x that should have been 100x

Yeah but they might stop making money if people stop using it….

I don’t think it will slow AI at this point, so much as it will concentrate control over AI even more into the hands of well funded, established players. OpenAI has already hired an army of software developer contractors to produce training data for Codex. The same could be done even more cheaply for writers. The technology is proven now, so there’s no risk anymore. We know that you just need the training data.

So the upshot would just be a higher barrier to entry. Training a new model means not only funding the compute, but also paying to create the training set.

I cannot see any possible way to define fair use the way you’re saying which wouldn’t have massive unintended effects. If you want to propose that, you’re going to need to be a hell of a lot more specific than “dumping into an AI” when describing what you think should actually be prohibited.

> Remember the outrage when Elon announced this on twitter.

There was some outrage, but mostly showed trends of people buying the subscription so their account seemed more important.

Elon gets outrage because Elon is an outrageous person. Not because he introduced a pay service for users who want to buy it.

Ask it explain anything and cite sources. All of the sources are hallucinated: The BBC exists, but the cites article doesn't.