As 2023 came to its end, a New York Times suit affirmed a general impression that Generative AI and ChatGPT would find some friction on the way to a well-hyped, lead-pipe cinch and especially glorious future.
For those that have used this software, a recent improvement on existing machine learning interaction, it is not surprising. Microsoft’s/OpenAI’s ChatGPT and its main competitor, Google Bard, are breakthroughs. They provide a different level of access to the world’s knowledge.
Instead of pointing the searcher to brief fair-use citations of Web stories ala Google Search, ChatGPT and Bard provide somewhat thoughtful summaries of issues — ones that might do a junior or middle-level manager quite well when it’s time for yearly performance evaluations.
The new paradigm for Web activity threatens beleaguered publishers. They are not on a roll. The 4th estate is now painted as an unwanted gate keeper of opinion. Publishers that saw an advertising market pulverized by Google Search results now see an AI wunderkind about to drain publishing’s last pennies.
An anticipated slew of AI suits is now spearheaded by the Times, which filed a lawsuit citing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright breach. Some go tsk, tsk. Wall Street oddsmakers that enjoyed an AI stock bump in 2023 were quickest to dismiss the Times’ chances versus ChatGPT. OpenAI has said it is in discussions with some publishers, and will work to achieve a beneficial arrangement.
Among the financial community, concern spreads that Generative AI’s magical abilities could be dampered. That is summed up by Danny Cevallos, MSNBC legal analyst, who worries about the impossible obligation to mechanize copyright royalties for AI citations across the globe.
The concerns comes despite the multidecade success of Silicon Valley’s Altruistic Surveillance movement. It can find you wherever you are, web users know. Still, Cevallos highlights the difficulty of, for example, finding and paying a copyright owner in a log cabin somewhere in Alaska.
“That would mean the end of future AI,” he said on CNBC’s Power Lunch. “It could be argued that the Times has to lose for progress to survive.”
We can anticipate that glory-bound Generative AI will find some rocks in its pathway in 2024 — but most will be in the form of stubborn, familiar IT implementation challenges. In the meantime, people that make a living in media will have to work to promote their interests, as other commercial interests chip away under the cover of AI progress. – Jack Vaughan
— 30 —