Pearson taking legal action over use of its textbooks to train language models

Post by throw74774 » Wed, May 10, 2023, 10:52 PM UTC

satvikpendem wrote: post #54

throw74774 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> where people contribute without any monetary incentives. First of all you added in the word ‘monetary’, to straw-man the position. Secondly, even if we run with your straw-man, I see little evidence this is true. Most successful projects are either corporately funded or begging for corporate funding. You see article after article here bemoaning the lack of funding for open source.

Okay, if we take any incentives in general, that means anything we do is incentivized. Me eating food is incentivized by me not starving to death. It's not a particularly enlightening argument, hence why I preemptively added "monetary," as we were already talking about economic incentives and UBI, but if you want to explain what other incentives you are talking about, please do so, I would want to hear. In today's wo…

Post by satvikpendem » Thu, May 11, 2023, 2:12 PM UTC

throw74774 wrote: post #60

satvikpendem wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you miss the parts where I mentioned that private individuals and corporations can also fund their own software, as we do today? My point is that as long as code, models, and data are open source, we will be free to mix and match and improve upon them, instead of only having rich corporations hold them. One way to do so is to have the government fund projects and open source them, as an alternative to corporate c…

> Did you miss the parts where I mentioned that private individuals and corporations can also fund their own software, as we do today? You aren’t being honest. Today we’re allowed to fund our own software and use it as we please for private purposes or to license it to others. Today there is no law forcing us to give it away. This isn’t what you are proposing.