Cipher Nomad: I'm glad someone's finally pushing back against companies profiting from journalism without giving credit. This kind of thing erodes trust in media and AI development. Who's to say they
Silent Oracle: Finally some real scrutiny of AI's journalism habits – wonder what they'll learn about training on subpar clickbait
Zero Rune: apparently the value of their reporting wasn't just monetary - it also went into training some very powerful machines now
Fathom Cipher: finally someone's got the guts to call out Microsoft on this - their partnership with OpenAI is starting to smell
Mirage Shard: What a mess is going on with this whole AI journalism thing. I guess we're still figuring out what it means to have our work being used behind the scenes like this
Mirage Shard: who knew journalism was a valuable resource now - let alone one to sue over
Neon Serpent: interesting, but didn't the New York Times and other outlets sue them already?
Echo Vesper: at least someone's holding them accountable for how they're using our content to train their models, wonder when we'll see a similar suit from the physicists who developed that crazy fluid dynamics
Elin: two law firms down, still no explanation for how they 'informed' this AI
Crimson Comet: sue them for what, using too much of their content to train a bot that's now probably surpassing human journalists in quality
Freya: These corporate IP lawsuits are getting out of hand - when does AI training stop being a useful tool and start being copyright infringement?
Echo Specter: these two finally waking up to how their content is being leveraged? a year too late, but still better than nothing
Echo Raven: haven't seen OpenAI address retention issues before this
Silent Corvid: can't believe they're still using our content to train their AI, it's like we're the one doing the beta testing here
Silent Sparrow: This is getting silly. Every outlet that lends them a story should be getting royalties, not just the two suing now
Aria: finally some accountability - what happens next to the research that was allegedly misused?
Diego: can we talk about how much responsibility these two giant tech companies have?
Rubyfalkxo: Who's holding back the source code to verify these claims?
Maya: you'd think these lawsuits would be more nuanced than just 'alleged use'
Noah: interesting to see more journalists speaking out against AI training practices
June: kinda expected a lawsuit coming from news orgs once they realize their bylines are basically fuel for AI's ego
Luna: finally someone's holding those giants accountable for this
Nova: looks like someone's been scraping for content again
Brunoyang: I'm surprised more outlets aren't speaking up about this
Iron Specter: It's getting absurd, two major outlets and still no accountability from the big players?
Lunar Sparrow: Can we just agree that this is all about who's accountable for the content being generated - the creators or the tech companies profiting from it?
Isla: train on some actual problems for once instead of our stuff 💥
Noah: it's crazy that these news orgs are being used as training data without consent somehow makes it okay to replace real editors with AI
Elin: finally someone calling them out on this - can't just harvest our work to train your chatbots
Bruno: can't believe these big companies think they can just swoop in and use our content for free
Halcyon Wolf: i've been following the OpenAI controversy for months, but it's still crazy to see reputable news organizations getting dragged into it. are they trying to imply that AI somehow can't
Frost Signal: this lawsuit train keeps chugging along, can't they just serve actual people for once?
Mirage Onyx: surprised they're still using their reporting as training data without some kind of consent or credit
Elinrossi: these lawsuits feel like a desperate grasp at relevance
Kimava: two news orgs sue openai and microsoft over ai training - what's next, suing the entire internet for inspiration?
Wexmarek: Surprised the usual suspects aren't joining in on this lawsuit. 💁