No.

Now that you have read my answer, you owe me $0.01 because your brain might use this information in the future.

So are you in favour of granting human rights to a machine? If not, your analogy makes zero sense because we are talking about a copyright laundering tool creating derivative works, not a thinking human that presumably we both are.

It doesn't seem to be answered in the article, but if it was and you read it should you have to pay them a fee for the knowledge if it was published openly on the net?

You are confusing two distinct cases.

In the first case, you found/bought a book and read it. No one can or should make you pay for it, unless you stole the book.

In the second case, you found/bought a book then reprinted it infinitely and sold it for profit, ethically you should pay the author and legally you should be in violation of the law.

Even if you made a machine that ingests and recombines books automatically, and you keep that machine locked up and charge people for its use, it is the same scenario: the machine would be absolutely useless without the original books, those books cost people effort and money to produce, yet you pay those people nothing while the machine is basically an infinite money maker for you.

I hope the analogy makes sense.

Which authors? Machine Learning research authors?

I mean the authors who wrote the works which are resold by Microsoft for its own profit without any opt-in or even opt-out, much less compensation.

Isaac Newton has sadly passed.

Yes, dead people are fine not being paid, so what’s your plan then I fear to ask?

The model is powered by math.

People's outrage to your valid question is ridiculous. MS and OpenAI will make billions because they scrapped lots and lots of data, but aurhors od those data can't get anything because openai simps will shout. I see this is very american thing to do. Allow corporations to do everything they want, because limitations or just justice and rewarding real authors of data those corporations benefit from is literally communism

Made my first million this year myself actually and I probably have many people to credit that I forgot to credit. I can start with Pythagoras, Galileo [insert everyone between], Kernighan, Ritchie. Also the guy who invented pencilin. I'm honestly not sure how these angles arise. Knowledge wants to be free. We are here today because of this fact.

When it comes to spam culture sure. But will we ever be there? "AI art" isn't impressive and will never be. It is impressive in the academic sense. Nothing more.

The motivation to produce original knowledge is that it is considered your intellectual property. By suggesting to abolish the notion of intellectual property, are you arguing for some form of communism?

Imagine Google scraping the Internet and not directing you to search results. We’d be with pitchforks the next day. But when OpenAI does it, that’s somehow okay…

Because at the other end of this equation you would have companies like disney holding you at gunpoint for money if you ever spoke about mice.

Oh yeah, because there can be only extremities. Sure.

Ok profits will be shared with all internet users. Send an invoice for $0.0000000000001 for your contributions to the internet corpus.