Ever wonder if you'd still use that AI chatbot if it actually paid every news outlet it scraped? I've been using it for months, and honestly—probably not. The thing is, most of these AI companies cherry-pick deals with a handful of publishers while quietly hoovering up content from thousands more. It's like streaming services back in the day: everyone loved Netflix until they realized artists were getting pennies.



Right now? Maybe five percent of legit journalism sources see a dime from training datasets. The rest just watch their archives get tokenized into someone else's profit engine. Makes you think about what "open access" really costs when the access only flows one direction.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
MerkleTreeHuggervip
· 12-02 16:49
They are all freeloaders, who would pay if they really had to, haha.
View OriginalReply0
SleepTradervip
· 12-02 12:04
Wow, this is the problem, taking content for free and then talking about Open Source, hilarious.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityWhisperervip
· 12-02 11:46
ngl this is just a Be Played for Suckers trick, taking others' hard work as a free lunch
View OriginalReply0
SundayDegenvip
· 12-02 11:38
ngl this is the issue that web3 has been discussing for a long time... content creators are always the ones who are played people for suckers.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)