undefined | Better HN

0 pointskarim792y ago0 comments

> Fair enough, but you were fully aware of this arrangement going in, and chose to participate.

Yep, but that's not the point.

> SO didn't opt into being training data for ChatGPT, and I doubt they would have given the chance.

Neither did Wikipedia (at least to my knowledge). I thought the point of opening up information was to benefit the public, first and foremost, and without hidden terms which state something along the lines of "it's free and open information built by the community, but when something disrupts our ads-driven business model and we make it unfree".

It would have been nice if they had at least allowed their contributors to vote on this, or have some sort of a say.

0 comments

baliex2y ago

> "it's free and open information built by the community, but when something disrupts our ads-driven business model and we make it unfree"

I feel the same, that it would be much better today if that was the agreement we all entered into. (Though, I doubt anyone would have read it anyway so I’m not sure it would have made any difference.)

But it seems that no-one saw this disruption coming, so it wasn’t possible to plan ahead for this outcome. Call it complacency, call it ignorance, it’s too late to plan now, so we get this kind of reaction instead

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse