No, no ... it's not about whether it makes a difference. I see the training data as something of a huge library that contains a significant and growing share of human thought. The way I see this, that is actually quite beautiful. Of course, I share many of your concerns about abuse, but then again – aren't our ideas like our children? We let them into the world to change it on their own terms. We hope that they are principled, and strong, and make a difference - but we could not wish for them to be ignored.
🙂
@boris_steipe I appreciate your perspective. For now, I want my human thought transferred to web pages to be opted out. I'm not as enthused about ChatGPT as the rest of the industry. I prefer a wait-and-see approach. The tech industry has a long history of rushing technologies to the market without adequately dealing with the ethics and impact they may have on society. That's what I'm seeing right now with the buzz around ChatGPT and similar AI solutions.
@boris_steipe actually, I'm torn. Common Crawl is good. This is more of my admittedly knee-jerk reaction to not wanting my content to be a part of the ChatGPT dataset. ChatGPT isn't intelligent. It only knows how to sound intelligent. I don't want my content to participate in the potentially erroneous content that ChatGPT may output. Opportunists, especially in the SEO world, will use this to trash the internet. I want to opt-out. It's more about principle. I know it won't make a difference.