Zuckerberg: Creators overestimate the value of their work for training AI

Should AI firms use copyrighted works without paying? Answer: “You’re overestimating your worth.”

Flip it around

First, I want to clarify that Mark Zuckerberg’s response was directed at publishers and authors currently in litigation with Meta.

He said:

• “I think individual creators or publishers tend to overestimate the value of their specific content in the grand scheme of this.”
• “When push comes to shove, if they demanded that we don’t use their content, then we just wouldn’t use their content. It’s not like that’s going to change the outcome of this stuff that much.”

Regardless, I think the argument is a red herring.

My response is simple: If the content isn’t important, why doesn't Meta simply stop using everyone's content?

Act first, bluster later

I’ve written about it before.

Companies like OpenAI, Meta, and Google have cut corners in their quest to harvest enough data for their AI models.

In fact, OpenAI's Whisper AI model, an automatic speech recognition service, was purportedly created to pilfer YouTube videos.

AI is the new gold rush, and the tech giants need as much "high-quality" data as possible. And yes, copyrighted works tend to be of high quality.

Face of news changing

Much as I abhor it given my 1,000s of published pieces on the Internet, I’m also a realist. The world is changing, and GenAI is never going back into the box.

Mark Zuckerberg's dismissive attitude towards publications here, as well as Meta's willingness to block news outlets in Australia and Canada does have a bearing on reality.

Almost all your favourite websites are struggling, and most are unlikely to stay the same. They will either:

• Close down.
• Start charging fees.
• Seek sponsors or government funding.

New sites will also arise, with a generation of smaller, trusted brands and individual creators. But that's a hypothesis for another day.

A decade from now, the open Internet will likely be a very different place.