Remember when companies like Google and Facebook got slapped with fines and fees from various countries for sumerizing news in “social feeds” on their sites.
News outlets were complaining about loss of ad revenue as a result of reduced traffic to their website directly, as consumers could get news summarized on their social feed.
Facebook even in some cases blocked news links in some countries from not showing on users feeds as a result, so as to be compliant with local passed laws and not pay fees or fines.
Then news outlets complained that no one was going to their sites because links were not being shared on social platforms. The very thing they complained about in the first place.
Guess AI summarising news is somehow completely different and a completely new challenge that politicans somehow don’t understand.
Remember when companies like Google and Facebook got slapped with fines and fees from various countries for sumerizing news in “social feeds” on their sites.
News outlets were complaining about loss of ad revenue as a result of reduced traffic to their website directly, as consumers could get news summarized on their social feed.
Facebook even in some cases blocked news links in some countries from not showing on users feeds as a result, so as to be compliant with local passed laws and not pay fees or fines.
Then news outlets complained that no one was going to their sites because links were not being shared on social platforms. The very thing they complained about in the first place.
Guess AI summarising news is somehow completely different and a completely new challenge that politicans somehow don’t understand.
The difference is that the AI summaries blatantly make shit up and actively contribute to the spread of misinformation
Would be interesting to know which is actually worse for spread of misinformation, AI summaries, or “news” being shared on Facebook.