• sramder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      6 months ago

      At this point I’m assuming most if not all of these content deals are essentially retroactive. They already scrapped the content and found it useful enough to try and secure future use, or at least exclude competitors.

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Honestly? I’m down with that. And when the LLM’s end up pricing themselves out of usefulness, we’ll still have the fediverse version. Having free sites on the net with solid crowd-sourced information is never a bad thing even if other people pick up the data and use it.

      It’s when private sites like Duolingo and Reddit crowd source the information and then slowly crank down the free aspect that we have the problems.

      The Ad sponsored web model is not viable forever.

      • bort@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        6 months ago

        The Ad sponsored web model is not viable forever.

        a thousand times this

    • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Assuming the federated version allowed contributor-chosen licenses (similar to GitHub), any harvesting in violation of the license would be subject to legal action.

      Contrast that with Stack Exchange, where I assume the terms dictated by Stack Exchange deprive contributors of recourse.

    • Rolando@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      But users and instances would be able to state that they do not want their content commercialized. On StackOverflow you have no control over that.