> Meta believes the dollars at the end of the AI race will be in walled gardens
Will those walls keep AI-generated content out, or will they keep the people outside from accessing the AI-generated content in the garden?
If it's the first, somebody should tell them the slop's already up to their navels and they probably shouldn't be helping people generate more of it.
If it's the second, then the models that supply the content to the garden must have some kind of uniqueness/value, because otherwise you could get identical content from anywhere.
This is a genuine question, because I don't understand the logic here.
(I had assumed it was more like hardware companies funding open source way back when - Commoditize Your Complement).
> If it's the first, somebody should tell them the slop's already up to their navels and they probably shouldn't be helping people generate more of it.
One would imagine Meta can readily quantify how much AI-generated content is consumed across its properties.
Meta's play is simple: more engagement means more money for Meta, and this can be done by "slop" as you called it, or alternatively expanding the audience of high quality human-generated content, say via translation. A funny video in Albanian is probably still very funny after being translated to English.
Will those walls keep AI-generated content out, or will they keep the people outside from accessing the AI-generated content in the garden?
If it's the first, somebody should tell them the slop's already up to their navels and they probably shouldn't be helping people generate more of it.
If it's the second, then the models that supply the content to the garden must have some kind of uniqueness/value, because otherwise you could get identical content from anywhere.
This is a genuine question, because I don't understand the logic here.
(I had assumed it was more like hardware companies funding open source way back when - Commoditize Your Complement).