| |
| ▲ | mschuster91 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | So, yet another permanent rent seeking scheme? That's bad enough for Netflix, D+, YouTube Premium, Spotify and god knows what else that bleeds money every month out of you. But science? That's something that IMHO should be paid for with tax money, so that it is accessible for everyone without consideration of one's ability to have money that can be bled. | | |
| ▲ | slantview 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is exactly the problem that pay-per-use LLM access is causing. It's gating the people who need the information the most and causing a divide between the "haves" and "have nots" but at a much larger potential for dividing us. Sure for me, $20/mo is fine, in fact, I work on AI systems, so I can mostly just use my employer's keys for stuff. But what about the rest of the world where $20/mo is a huge amount of money? We are going to burn through the environment and the most disenfranchised amongst us will suffer the most for it. | |
| ▲ | PeterStuer 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The situation we had/have is arguably the result of the 'tax' money system. Governments lavishly funding bloated university administrations that approve equally lavish multi million access deals with a select few publishers for students and staff, while the 'general public' basically had no access at all. | | |
| ▲ | spookie 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | The publishers are the problem. Your solution asks the publisher to extort less money. Aka not happening. |
|
|
|
