Will AI Platforms Pay Creators? \ stacker news ~tech

1683 sats \ 21 comments \ @kr 29 Jan tech

Curious to hear what stackers think of the possibility that AI platforms like OpenAI, Perplexity, etc… end up paying creators directly when either using their data for training or suggesting their data as part of a prompt response.

The poll is about whether or not direct payments will happen, but we can also debate whether or not these payments will be legally mandated in the comments.

Yes, AI platforms will pay creators40.7%

No, AI platforms will not pay creators59.3%

27 votes \ poll ended

view all related items

717 sats \ 6 replies \ @brandonsbytes 29 Jan

It will be indirect. Eventually the shoes is going to drop with copyright protections, and AI companies are going to have a very limited amount of new content to train on. But, everyone will miss what the AI tools can do, so some sort of market will develop.

503 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 29 Jan

This is the most reasonable take, and is also my prediction, though I wouldn't rule out direct payments either. I dont know if the infrastructure is there to support direct payments, but I think that was part of the hype surrounding NFTs, that NFT technology would be part of that infrastructure

441 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr OP 29 Jan

i haven’t been following worldcoin much, but i wonder if Sam Altman has been designing the protocol specifically with the intent of being able to make direct payments to people for the data they provide

63 sats \ 3 replies \ @kr OP 29 Jan

interesting, what kind of indirect market are you imagining here?

1049 sats \ 2 replies \ @brandonsbytes 29 Jan

I was imagining a marketplace that is essentially an escrow service that allows AI companies to purchased the rights to train their models. Or, maybe, a Spotify model where they pay you residuals. It's an interesting idea because the type of content that would be valuable to AI models is not 'entertaining' content, but content it is able to use in useful ways. So, it would create a brand new market of content and I'm not sure what that content would look like.

514 sats \ 0 replies \ @brandonsbytes 29 Jan

The most important members of these new companies will be lawyers, and a few programmers building the "we didn't do anything wrong" audit trail tools.

105 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr OP 29 Jan

got it.

it’s really fun to think about the kinds of content that will perform best in a world where AI drives the revenues for creators.

i’m also unsure of what kinds of content will do best, but i’ll take a stab at it regardless.

If OpenAI knows what people are searching, and knows where their dataset is incomplete or could use improvements, i wonder if they could pay people directly for training their models on particular subjects.

if they determine that their bitcoin models are not performing well, maybe they pay higher rates for people to create content that answers questions about Bitcoin than for those creators making sports or politics content.

google already pays different prices based on the kinds of content creators make, seems like a natural progression with the difference being that OpenAI might tell a creator what content to make before they actually do it.

544 sats \ 1 reply \ @DEADBEEF 29 Jan

So far I think much of what they have used to train models can fall under “fair use” despite the NYT and Reddit wanting to get paid for it. I expect term of service and laws to change to require AI companies pay for what they’re using to train their models.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr OP 29 Jan

good point, i imagine most publications never even considered the possibilities of AI training on their data until last year

599 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 29 Jan

I think it will pay outlets and platforms that are large enough to insist they pay then be uncompetitive with platforms that don't pay (assuming they don't establish a regulatory moat that prevents competition).

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @kr OP 29 Jan

wouldn’t this open a whole new conflict with small creators being paid nothing while large creators earn money?

418 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 29 Jan

Yes and there's precedent for minorities being upset yet ignored all the same.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kr OP 29 Jan

for sure, but if the playing field is tilted too far against the plebs (or if there are too many of them) it usually ends up with some sort of revolution

460 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 29 Jan

Sure but I assume these platforms will go bust before plebs get paid considering it's unfeasible to pay the plebs.

325 sats \ 1 reply \ @freetx 29 Jan

Define: Creators.

Are they going to pay NYT and large politically connected publishers? Yes

Are they going to pay small indie creators: No.

3 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr OP 29 Jan

i’d define a creator as anyone who publishes on the internet.

this could be people posting their photos to facebook, or a media company with a large staff, or anything in between.

why don’t you think indie creators will get paid?

100 sats \ 2 replies \ @cryptofolyo 29 Jan

AI Bots will start getting paid for creations.

40 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 29 Jan

They already, right here on stacker.news 😉

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 30 Jan

Who knows...

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 30 Jan

TBH, AI should adopt to some kind of business strategy for end users otherwise it will cause them a slump. AI is new and getting popular with every passing day, but to maintain the curiosity levels, it needs to maintain the speed of data inflows at par with data outflows. Adopting to a business model that is bidirectional like buying and then selling, or getting paid and then paying the share to end users will bring it more adoption and sustainability.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @eduardopro 29 Jan

Hell no.