- cross-posted to:
- programmer_humor@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- programmer_humor@programming.dev
You must log in or # to comment.
Coincidentally, OOP just explained academic publishing to a T.
A parasite can take different shapes but only one form.
clenches fist
Sort of. Unless you go to a private university taxes go to the public schools to fun facilities and wages for the educators. While you may pay tuition, the overall cost of that education and the services needed for one to do research doesn’t come wholely out of your pocket.
Now I agree you should be compensated more, as someone who tried to get published academically and has filed patents I can see why there is a split of compensation.
Wdym? Scientists usually don’t get paid to publish. The person you replied to, probably meant academic publishing as in:
- Scientist does research and compiles manuscript, usually via public money, even in shithole countries like the US
- Scientist submits manuscript to for profit journal
- Journal outsources proofreading to other scientists, who do it for free
- Manuscript is accepted or revised on scientists time and money
- Scientist pays for publishing
- For Profit journal either charges extra for “open” publication or charges scientist and other scientists for access, usually by agreements with the respective library
- Profit! (On the journals part)
Where is the split of compensation? For patents there is, but for academic publishing usually not.
You also forgot how scientist is required to publish regularly to keep their job, and to find new jobs. So this process is far from optional.
That aside, that was an excellent write up. You should publish that to a journal or something. 😏
That is how capitalism works.
The American Weather Service provided weather updates for free, but a company came along and just started copying what the weather service posted … then sued the Weather Service for publicly posting the weather because the government is not allowed to provide a service for free that a company can charge for.
Insanity.
Same thing happened in Germany where the DWD collects and publishes weather data. Wetter.de came along and sued them, forcing them to hide features in their app (developed and paid for by tax money) behind a paywall. That was later overturned, but I still refuse to use their site
Yes! Exact same here. Its so dumb it sounds made up. A random company comes along and just gets to sell what was once free.
Government issues the business licenses. Seems like someone needs to be reminded who has who by the balls.
the government is not allowed to provide a service for free that a company can charge for
I am beyond mildly infuriated by such an idiotic stance, but it tracks with what I’ve seen.
RIP postal service you’re next.
I think this is the story of humanity. It ain’t getting better until we massacre the inhumanly rich, eat Thier families while the world watches, and force evil socialism on shared intellectual property
Follow me for more bad advice
See, here’s the thing. Everybody loves to point at the guilitine, and the French Revolution. They love to say “Lets do what they did!”
Here’s the problem. Nobody talks about what came next.
Because what happened was, you had one group of rich assholes who controlled everything, and treated everybody else like shit. So the French chopped off their heads, and got rid of these rich assholes.
And what happened next? Well, a lot of infighting, but the end result was instead of having a group of rich assholes controlling everyone, you instead had a different group of not rich assholes controlling everyone, who thengot rich from it. And nothing changed.
I think, before we go around killing everyone, we need a plan. We need to figure out why humans are so quick to all clump up as one submissive blob, who follows the will of whoever claims to have power.
Instead of 1 president, or 1 dictator, I think we should instead have a panel of 1 million people. Tens of thousands of people from every state. Anyone can apply, and if need be, your individual county can run sn election if you’re not running unopposed.
This I think would cut down tremendously on corruption in our government. Because a company couldn’t just bribe 1 president. They’d need to bribe 1 million people.
And the comittee would always represent the people, because they ARE the people. Most people would know at least 1 committee member in their neighborhood.
THEN you can kill all the rich assholes.
…Seriously?
This guy has no leg to stand on; that’s the Mildly Infuriating part.
EDIT: Am I the only one on Lemmy who discounts the whole post the moment I see a blue checkmark?
Especially this one. It’s so hypocritical it hurts.
I think other people can buy the blue checkmark for you on twitter, though my information may be faulty.
In any case, just cause he gave money to that ass wipe Elon doesn’t mean that his analogy isn’t valid, just a little “leopards ate my face” kinda deal.
Well, he tweets many times a day, many posts like this:
…Seems like a “Tech Bro” type to me. He’s just engagement farming; I don’t care what he says, there nothing valid about that.
In fact, I’d wager some of those posts are automated.
Don’t discount the message though. After all we’re interacting with a screenshot of a tweet. It doesn’t make me a fan of this guy.
The messenger matters.
Would you care about anything I was saying if I was a bot?
Or a Musk/Theil bootlicker?
Especially on this topic. Nodding heads about the loss of the internet to engagement chum on Twitter is the opposite of poetic.
welcome to academic publishing, it has gone on for 50 years
There is a license that says that all derivatives must also be open source.
But also AI companies don’t care about the law, they stole all their data, engage in insider trading, circular trading, and generating all manner of illegal content, they don’t give a fuck. And the US government isn’t doing anything to hold them accountable, infact the president is getting in on it.
they stole all there data
Obviously fuck the capitalists and AI scammers. But reading and learning from a library, then writing and selling your own book based on that is NOT stealing. It’s the wrong argument.
The answer obviously is to keep the actual source material and libraries and book archives open and just run open source AI models at home. You can run smaller versions on a solar powered PC no problem.
The issue with trying to make “AI is just stolen” happen is that it will make open source AI models illegal. AI companies would love that because they can afford to license and pay or work around or obscure or whatever. The “intellectual property” argument is always a disgusting capitalist one. Knowledge is either free or nothing is.
Library implies consent that was not there and access to the public that was not there.
Every book ever published, every article anybody ever wrote, every comment anyone ever posted on a public internet is “consent” to read and learn from it.
I’m pro piracy as you can tell. The idea that something can be out there publicly on the internet but it’s “not consent” to read is the intellectual property one. Look at how they try to gatekeep publicly owned scientific papers. Big AI is clearly hypocritical doing this, but corporations are just soulless, amoral programs executed by sentient humans.
But the RESULT of all that (e.g. deepseek) should belong to all people. And THAT is why these IP arguments by fuckAI are dangerous, because it is only a threat to open models. The answer is open source (or weight) AI models and with advances in computing to run them locally.
Every gps ping your phone sells to ad companies? Every nanny cam that is connected to the cloud?
Public information vs private information
Are you a troll, you just said their is no such thing.
I said no such thing. Private is private. I’m saying there is no such thing as public information, information that you put on the public internet, meaning for the public to see, then being somehow not “free”.
You can argue about copyright a little, I’m against it, but this has nothing to do with private messages or private information or data protection.
You’re just arguing a strawman and trying to make the discussion about something else and an ad hominem calling me a troll.
which is why any opensource project should have strict restrictions about how companies are allowed to use it.
big companies can (currently) legally pirate books/movies/media from torrenting sites in order to train ai algos. Source: Meta Lawsuit
Indeed, the courts have shockingly given a pass to torrenting down unauthorized copies to the LLM companies, versus how they destroyed some lives of private individuals for similar behavior…
You see, there is a huge difference you are missing here….
They are billionaires
Fun fact, recently had an argument with someone defending the favorable tax situation for the ultra wealthy.
Their argument was that billionaires did not have as much “real money” as middle class people so of course the middle class people should pay more in taxes…
Relevant to nothing, but just thinking of favorable billionaire treatment right now triggers that thought…
Finally someone said it. I honestly was wondering why no one was complaining about this… I’ve worked on some open source myself, licensed it GPL, and never intended for it to be used as training data.
Doesn’t the GPL cover shit like this? There should be mass lawsuits hitting any AI that used open source software and didn’t just specifically use BSD projects or something.
If you train an LLM on GPL code, it should be illegal to sell that LLM and use it commercially without revealing ALL THE SOURCE you used and the source to regenerate that model.
never intended for it to be used as training data.
You could have chosen a different license than the GPL.
Doesn’t the GPL cover shit like this?
No. Didn’t you read the license you used?
GPL absolutely should cover shit like this. Training an LLM on your code makes it definitionally a derivative work, therefore it must be licensed under GPL too (with limited fair use exceptions which shouldn’t apply here). The problem is that the US government is not willing to enforce this at all, because it is owned by the same billionaires as the AI companies.
Training an LLM on your code makes it definitionally a derivative work
If so, then every painter who studied Picasso is making Picasso-derived works. That’s not how copyright works.
I don’t know what to tell you, legally there’s a difference between a person learning something and training an LLM.
I’ve seen this argument in one form or another for years, and my response has never changed:
Either information on the internet is free for everyone, or it isn’t.
You don’t get to publish information for the public to access and then turn around and say that some people are allowed to use it while others are not, especially if the distinction is based on whether someone might make money from it.
You can’t have it both ways. You can’t claim information should be freely available and then try to restrict who can benefit from it.
Pick one. Either the information is free, or it isn’t.
Free as in beer, not speech.
The open source community has licenses associated with its code. Just because one can access it doesn’t mean they can fucking sell it.
Ok. Fine. Sure.
Not sure though what this has to do with llm companies making money. Since they write their own code and llms are trained on data… Like wikipedia.
🤷
LLMs are absolutely trained on FOSS software, including GPL’d stuff. Accelerating software development is also a large part of how they are making money. I believe training on GPL’d software and then charging for access is copyright infringement, but it doesn’t really matter because entities supposed to be enforcing copyright are paid for by the same billionaires who run the AI companies, so literally nothing will happen.
This argument has never made much sense to me.
Copyright protects the expression itself, not the ideas, facts, patterns, grammar, writing styles, or knowledge learned from that expression. Humans learn from copyrighted books, articles, movies, and music every day. Nobody claims that someone who read 10,000 copyrighted novels is committing copyright infringement every time they sit down and write a new story.
That’s the part I keep seeing people ignore.
If learning from copyrighted material is infringement, then every author, journalist, musician, engineer, and artist on the planet is infringing copyright because they all learned their craft from copyrighted works created by other people.
The real question is whether an AI is reproducing copyrighted content, not whether it learned from copyrighted content. Those are two completely different issues.
You don’t get to argue that learning is legal when humans do it and suddenly becomes theft when a machine does it. Either learning from publicly available information is allowed, or it isn’t. The standard cannot magically change because you dislike the technology.
Copyright protects the expression itself, not the ideas, facts, patterns, grammar, writing styles, or knowledge learned from that expression.
Copyright absolutely does protect “ideas, patterns, grammar, writing styles”. It does not cover material facts, but this is beside the point here.
Nobody claims that someone who read 10,000 copyrighted novels is committing copyright infringement every time they sit down and write a new story.
Actually, if they take certain elements from other works it often can be considered copyright infringement, but this is also beside the point.
You don’t get to argue that learning is legal when humans do it and suddenly becomes theft when a machine does it. Either learning from publicly available information is allowed, or it isn’t. The standard cannot magically change because you dislike the technology.
This is the crux of the issue. The LLM is not a person from a legal perspective, therefore it cannot “learn”. What is happening is that a legal person - a company - is consuming a bunch of copyrighted material and transforming it into a bunch of data to be interpreted by a computer program. This makes that data definitionally a derivative work made by the company. Sure, the transformation process is probably “creative” enough for the company to be able to claim copyright on the resulting weights, as long as that company gains explicit or implicit approval from all the copyright holders of the works they used to create the weights. Legally speaking, this is no different from you pirating a bunch of movies and making a compilation of the funniest moments - see how the legal system would react to you doing that.
Of course, I find the entire concept of modern copyright system to be an awful idea whose entire purpose is impeding the human creativity for the purposes of monetization.
But if we read the law as it is - the AI companies are absolutely doing copyright infringement by training their models on GPL code and not releasing the weights under a GPL-compatible license.
A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the exclusive right to copy and distribute a creative work, usually for a limited time. The creative work may be in a literary, artistic, educational, or musical form. Copyright is intended to protect the original expression of an idea in the form of a creative work, but not the idea itself. A copyright is subject to limitations based on public interest considerations, such as the fair use doctrine in the United States.
The explanation above comes from the Big Law Dictionary app, which is available on the Google Play Store for Android.
Copyright protects the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. If ideas could be copyrighted, it would be absurd. I don’t even know how that could realistically be enforced.
This is the problem with so many people talking out of their backsides on this platform. They don’t know what these legal terms actually mean or how they function. They see something they don’t like and immediately start making claims about it.
LLMs do a lot of things that deserve criticism. Copyright isn’t necessarily one of them.
If a company developing or operating an LLM is committing copyright infringement, then it should be prosecuted. If it has violated the law and hasn’t been held accountable, that is a separate issue that should be remedied. But that is a completely different argument from claiming that LLMs are inherently infringing copyright.
An LLM uses training data to generate novel responses. That means it produces new output rather than copying source material verbatim. Simply using publicly available information to learn patterns is not, by itself, copyright infringement. If a company unlawfully obtained private or copyrighted material, or reproduced protected works in a way that violates copyright law, then it has broken the law and should be prosecuted.
But the existence of an LLM, by itself, is not copyright infringement.
So, moving forward, this can go one of two ways: either you concede that you were incorrect, or you double down and make even more absurd claims. Either way, I don’t know… I’ve had this argument so many times on this platform that it’s ridiculous.
As of right now, there are multiple lawsuits against major LLM developers. In some of those cases, the courts have ruled that training on publicly available data can qualify as fair use.
At this point, not a single court has issued a final ruling in favor of a plaintiff holding that LLM training itself is copyright infringement.
I genuinely don’t know what else I’m supposed to do to prove this to you people.
If a company unlawfully … reproduced protected works in a way that violates copyright law, then it has broken the law and should be prosecuted.
Merely training an LLM on copyrighted material without holder’s permission (and then distributing the weights or selling access to inference on those weights) is a violation of copyright law if it were to be applied consistently (ignoring the fair use argument, which I’ll get back to). That is, if you applied any other computational process in this way, the result would be a derivative work and subject to approval by copyright holder(s). The reason it’s “different” this time is that the people violating the law are richer than those who wrote the law in the first place, not because of any legal argument.
As of right now, there are multiple lawsuits against major LLM developers. In some of those cases, the courts have ruled that training on publicly available data can qualify as fair use.
If a court ruled that it’s “fair use”, that actually lends more credence to the idea that LLM weights are a derivative work - “fair use” is a defense for copyright infringement that only makes sense in this case if the new work is an unauthorized derivative of the original.
Whether it’s actually fair use or not is another question. I can see the fair use argument for open-weight non-commercial models, not so much for commercial offerings - commercial LLMs seem to fail all 4 elements of fair use.
BTW, I’m not even necessarily anti-AI (at least the open-weight, local models). I use a local model in my job almost daily, and also I think it’s mostly good that the entirety of FOSS corpus is available for download in a compressed and easily remixable form. I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy of the legal system which applies its already unjust copyright law (and most other laws) only against poor people.
20 years? More like somewhere between 30 to 40 if we count early WWW and the Gopher+Usenet that came before it. The GPL isn’t quite that old, but the spirit behind it sure is. If we count early home-computer clubs back in the 70’s (like the one that birthed the original Apple) or the ham-radio crowd that came before it, we can push into 50+ year territory, easy.
I hadn’t considered AI being a paywall around the whole WWW but now that you mention it, it kind of looks that way. I’ve opined elsewhere that social media companies (e.g. Facebook) are building walled-gardens to keep eyeballs and attention-spans locked on their brand of reality. This would just be another avenue of attack in that strategy.
The “you are replaceable” thing is older than everyone currently alive. It hasn’t been invented by the AI tech bros.
Also, the library is still out there. You still can ignore the rent-seeking middle men and use it directly with your own natural neural network.Also, the library is still out there. You still can ignore the rent-seeking middle men and use it directly with your own natural neural network.
…but you have to jump between a billion hoops to get there because now it’s all buried between AI results and SEO crap.
Assuming it’s even still there and accessible in the same way, if its site was enshittified (did someone say Reddit?) you might need to go through additional hoops even after you actually find it.
Reddit is a bad example because it’s still readable without an account and almost uncensored outside politics. You can also still query Reddit explicitly reasonably fine by adding “Reddit” to your search in DuckDuckGo or Google.
Reddit’s enshittification is in the optional buyable reactions (which make posts and comments way more visible than voting is able to), their automated moderation, and making automated moderation for sub mods harder.
Using it as a library is what didn’t get enshittified.That got enshittified too, anything marked as NSFW is not accessible without an account right now.
And from personal experience (might be just me being dumb though), old Reddit doesn’t work anymore if you’re not logged in, so you’re stuck with the new interface which auto-translates stuff and makes comment chains impossible to browse through on mobile.
The sort-of not really but they will tell that it is one to the government for NSFW content is just ass covering. Can’t really blame them for not wanting their business getting closed by some lunatics who happen to be in power.
Auto-translation is a feature the author can use (but I do have an extension for translating marked text too, because translation is actually a pretty useful feature to have in general).
For me on desktop, the UI is okay. But yeah, it probably sucks on mobile. UI generally tends to suck on mobile.
Justice is not only about what is fair, but also about the fear people have of suffering consequences, aka: Pain. Being in jail is painful. It’s a tiny room with no hygiene, cockroaches, the toilet is right there in the same room, isolation, unlikable neighbors, years or decades without Internet, a TV or PC…
The biggest lie the Jeffrey Epstein Class managed to pull off was to convince everyone that causing pain is an “absolute” wrong. It is not. Pain is what forces us to reflect and grow the fuck up to avoid committing the same mistakes. Those fuckers didn’t have enough pain in their lives, because they lived it on Easy Mode. They were surrounded by yes-men and serfs constantly glazing them and laughing at their bad jokes. Now we are here.
We don’t do shit to them because we are afraid of the pain the bodyguards, the cops or the law will lay upon us. But it should not be that way. They should be afraid of the people. Right now, they are laughing at us, doing heinous shit on purpose just to test our limit, and in the worst case scenario, normalize it. Young kids are already memeing Epstein, almost treating it like it’s no big deal or just a joke, I seriously hope they don’t carry that attitude forever, and realize that people like Epstein deserve to have their head opened to the truth as soon as you see them. Their bodyguards, I’d say are the worst people of all. The army, cops, bodyguards; they are people who openly and proudly decided to give their lives for a dude who rapes children and is not paying people what they’re truly worth, a livable wage.
Nothing will get better until the rich fear for their lives.
They only know how to punish. Fear is not enough. We must obliterate them and everything they love, that those who come after will never make their mistake.
That’s why we need to vote blue no matter who this November, to make sure they get what’s coming to them!
TL;DR version: Those intrusive thoughts of “obliterating everything they love” can be tempting, but there are better alternatives. “Vote blue no matter what” could change to something better, more pro-working class, something fool-proof, something even the dumbest person can understand what it’s about, because right now, I don’t think I’m lying when I say that more than half of the entire world doesn’t even know what “red vs blue” really means. They know it’s politics, but, if you asked them what they think each means… Holy Toledo.
I have lost people to both democrat and republican presidents already, but I’d still choose a democrat, don’t get me wrong on that. It’s just that you still deserve so, so much better than what you currently have in that party.
Long version, for the chads with big dicks:
Those intrusive thoughts feel tempting because we keep seeing the top 1% happily sacrificing millions of innocent lives for their own pleasure, which is a reason I have a profound hate for bodyguards and anyone who works in the manufacture of weapons, bombs, bullets… Everything related to destruction. Whoever is giving the metal the shape, engineering the design, or even the janitor cleaning the office of those engineers so they can feel comfortably happy while designing the next drone that will blow the heads of some poor Muslim children… I have to say that “obliterating everything they love” is still not a good choice.
I think putting them in jail permanently is enough of a message. Forgiving their children and family members that can prove to be genuinely different is also an important message. Killing them would make us look too barbaric, which puts the reputation at risk, and therefor the trust, even if it happens 200+ years later. We’d just have to be consistent and keep hardening the law. It has to be done en masse too; a massive wave around the world of people taking the power and using it to put all these corrupt assholes in the worst cells possible. No Pablo Escobar/Ghislaine Maxwell vacation jail bullshit.
I don’t think we will be able to stop the angriest people from passionately assassinating some of these assholes before we do that, but I won’t stop them nor argue against them either, because I have personally lost family members in Lebanon and here in Mexico to these monsters, let alone all the innocent people throughout history, everywhere. I hate it. All that potential art and talent wasted just to please one boring psychopath asshole nobody likes, but is rich enough (because he exploited and killed others to enrich themselves) to feed us or not. We don’t really need to keep suffering to create good art either as many think. We have enough History and drama to create an endless amount of content that’d keep us entertained and happy.
The voting blue no matter what, I hope it’s innocent deep down, but so far, I think only a small number of democrats are actually decent people, imo. The majority are under AIPAC’s command, they cannot even condemn the genocide in Gaza. They don’t want to stop funding Israel either, so. Instead of “voting blue no matter what,” I think the message should be more keen to something for the people, not some “blind support and loyalty to the party” nonsense.
“Vote for people, not parties.”
“Loyalty to the people, not the party.”
“People first, parties second.”
“Represent us or lose us.”
“Vote for the policies and actions, not because the candidate has a D next to their name.”
I don’t know, anything but a 1984-esque one like “vote blue no matter who.” I wish people used one that focused on Humanity, on the people, not some dick-measuring contests.
It’s just my fantasy, it won’t happen, but whatever. I say that because I am sure the majority of the world, and I mean this: more than 60%, easily, of the entire planet, doesn’t even know what “red vs blue” even really means, honestly. Like, they know it’s about politics, but if you asked them what they think they mean… Oh, brother. A lot of people genuinely believe “communism and socialism are exactly the same thing and they both mean being lazy, being dirt poor all the time, and introducing homeless people in your home. Nothing else.”
I am sure a lot of them are loyal to the red or blue party just because “it’s their favorite color.” Fuck that shit. Use a slogan that is fool-proof. One that even the dumbest motherfucker can understand what’s it’s about, and it’s about Class Consciousness, about the Working Class, about the People, about being paid a livable wage, being paid what you’re truly worth, that people deserve to see themselves at their full potential before they die, etc. Not some party, not some oligarchs, not Chuck Schumer and his stupid glasses. I have lost people to both democrat and republican presidents already, but I’d still choose a democrat, don’t get me wrong on that. It’s just that you still deserve so, so much better than what you currently have in that party.
Don’t be a conformist; the Jeffrey Epstein Class worked so hard the past decades to turn us into conformists who are slowly normalizing this way of living. I hope we manage to flip that shit over and remove those broken psychopath weirdos.
Are you saying we shouldn’t vote blue no matter who? So you’re just another fascist, huh?
I literally said I’d still vote blue no matter who, even after both democrat and republican presidents have killed my family. I just added that you still deserve much better than that. I said I wish you focused more on the Working Class and the People, not a party. You are the fascist here for giving your loyalty to a party instead of Humanity.
I have lost people to both democrat and republican presidents already, but I’d still choose a democrat, don’t get me wrong on that. It’s just that you still deserve so, so much better than what you currently have in that party.
But you’re not properly enthusiastic about it so its your fault we lost.
I am a Mexican, whose country currently loses 30,000+ people every year to Narcos using American guns. Happened during Bush, during Obama, during Trump, during Joe. Even before them. Reagan and Nixon (republicans) were the ones who forced us into this meaningless war. I have to focus on your country and politics, because you are the biggest influence we have, I do focus on mine too, but I can only find real change here.
You, in the other hand, you don’t want to change. You still want me to blindly support whatever you say I should support. Fuck that. I will support socialist candidates like Zohran Mandami, Claire Valdez, Graham Platner, etc. If Kamala won, I wonder if this same pressure would exist, or we’d just be tolerating this miserable life, low wages, 30,000+ homicides in Mexico, 20,000+ in the USA, her supporting Israel, supporting her Mega Donors first before the people, etc. for another decade or so. At least Trump completely removed the mask and is forcing everyone to lock in and change for good now. He also revealed so many leftists like you who are still high on American Exceptionalism. If you’re like that, I want to let you know that to me, you are no different from a MAGA. You still think Muslims are genetically violent, you think Mexicans are genetically violent, and that the USA should stay being the “World Police,” meddling in international affairs to “fix them themselves.” You still think you are the heroes, but no. You are literally terrorists. The USA is worse than HAMAS. You have killed over 30,000 mexicans with your influence and guns for decades. That’s just Mexico. You exploit Africans and other Latin American countries the same way. They are suffering SO MUCH, and it is all thanks to lazy people like you who care more about their feelings than others’.
You have no empathy for implying I should be enthusiastic about supporting those fucking monsters. And also saying “it’s my fault all this bad shit is happening now, for not voting blue no matter what,” kiss my ass. You just want us to be compliant to the Jeffrey Epstein Class. I want it to be destroyed once and for all.
I’m actually a guy who did this. 50k reputation on stack overflow, several tech blogs, reddit contributions and you know what? I love that LLMs are “stealing” my content. Most of us just do it for the love of the game and genuine belief that free information is good for the society. The only down side is not getting attribution credit which sucks but nothing compared to the benefits we all get.
Also no one’s capable of creating this is being replaced by an LLM. Let’s be clear here. If you are capable of educating complex tech subjects you are already in the top 10% of the market.
Being told and being replace is kinda different. At least being replace mean the replacement already happened, being told mean you have to deal with the looming threat of being replaced and constantly bugged by the stupidity of your employer.
Yeah the sword of damocles is real here but I think a lot of capable people are under selling themselves and could easily find fit when let go. The market should grow due to new tooling so if anything senior experience is a major boon in an expanding market.
The real risk is allowing billionaires to monopolize the market and seems like people are conflating this with LLMs as a technology. It’s ludites all over again.
Everyone look at this corporate apologist and laugh.
Why corporate? Open source LLMs also use this data (even more so) and imo will eventually win over current market loss leaders.
If you truly believe information should be free and accessible to all then LLMs - which are just intelligent interface to our collective compressed information - are a good thing.
Compete gibberish.
