←back to thread

54 points elektor | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.328s | source
Show context
dpacmittal ◴[] No.44389729[source]
Is it only me who feels its incredibly unfair for publishers, that not only did big tech trained their LLMs on free content authored by these publishers, but it's also killing their future revenue. It's like stealing from someone and then making sure they never make money again.
replies(15): >>44389781 #>>44389783 #>>44389791 #>>44389872 #>>44389919 #>>44389923 #>>44389956 #>>44389993 #>>44390022 #>>44390123 #>>44390136 #>>44390180 #>>44393273 #>>44393840 #>>44395240 #
azemetre ◴[] No.44389993[source]
Yes it's unfair. It's digital colonialism. What's sad is that other companies keep falling for the false narrative that big tech monopolies act as partners and not the blood sucking leeches they've become to represent.
replies(3): >>44390090 #>>44390102 #>>44392266 #
csallen ◴[] No.44390090[source]
Competition in the free market is not colonialism. The capitalistic marketplace is meant to involve disruption. That's the entire point: new companies come along and out-compete and out-innovate older companies and business models. The consumer wins. This is not the same as invading countries and subjugating the inhabitants, who have a human right to a peaceful life. No business in a capitalistic marketplace has a "right" to continue enjoying profits and resist innovation.
replies(5): >>44390182 #>>44390286 #>>44390414 #>>44391134 #>>44393300 #
1. Ecstatify ◴[] No.44390182[source]
What new companies? Google is a monopoly, along with most other major tech platforms. When a handful of corporations control entire market sectors and actively acquire or crush potential competitors, that's not free market competition, that's market consolidation that prevents the very disruption you're describing. The "creative destruction" of capitalism requires actual competition to exist, not just the theoretical possibility of it.