There is value add in AI irrespective of how the data got to what it is.

Literally the biggest thing of our generation - AI - is the living embodiment of that 'value add' writ large.

'What is the difference' - is the AI you use all day, in comparison to 'all the world's data' you can use for stuff and do 'whatever' with it, but are not likely to come up with something hugely useful otherwise. Maybe, not likely, if you did, it would be 'value add'.

▲

nemomarx 14 hours ago | parent [-]

Okay, so if the chinese models are used everyday, do they become a value add? Like what's the line you're drawing here. Amount of value it creates?

▲

bluegatty 12 hours ago | parent [-]

Designing and creating an LLM from nothing is a monumental feat of Engineering and 'value add'.

Copying something is not.

Programming Microsoft Word is value add, copying the code is not.

Copying design ... there are some question marks there.

It's extremely easy to understand at it's core.

What makes it hard, is that faux intellectuals like to deconstruct ideas at the margins, and have those critiques stand in for reason.

"At sunrise the sun is only 'half there' ... there fore there is no 'day and night' just a blur! Day and night are the same thing!"

The training data used is part of all of this is a separate but related question.

	▲	inigyou 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		they all just copied the Transformers paper anyway