top | item 46206502

(no title)

BDPW | 2 months ago

Appropriate compensation is a non-issue? I have the impression many people jump on the hate-EU train for no other reason than there's many comments reinforcing it.

What do you really think about this case in particular? I'm pretty curious where this comes from.

discuss

order

zb3|2 months ago

Who should receive the compensation? If I want to know the answer to a particular question and most search results point to SEO garbage which doesn't even answer it, then who should be compensated and for what? If those SEO garbage websites are to be compensated, doesn't that just incentivize more garbage?

BDPW|2 months ago

I don't know. I don't really care about the details in this case, I just don't really get the dismissive attitude that often surrounds things like this. Do you think this is not something that is worth looking into if it happens at such as large scale?

Just do be clear, I use genAI all the time for finding info and answering questions, so my browsing habits changed as well. I'm the kind of person who this case would indirectly be about. But don't you think that it's valuable to look at how do we compensate people who create content when their content is being used by genAI.

Many people seem to have the feeling of 'oh it's too late and those websites were garbage anyway (whatever that means), who cares'. Don't you think that's a bit of a silly way to go about this?

sajithdilshan|2 months ago

Appropriate compensation for what? The summary is generated on the publicly available information.

BDPW|2 months ago

If using data from those websites in a way decreases their visitors or something similar then I think there's an argument to be made for that. I don't know the details to case but just because something is publicly visible doesn't mean that you can just do anything you want with it.