Is AI Really Going to Steal All of YOUR Content?

99
2.4M followers

Currently, the OpenAI database relies on data from several sources. When I ask OpenAI where it gets it's information from, it responds:

"My information comes from a variety of sources including academic journals, newspaper articles, magazines, websites, books, and other reliable sources. Specific sources may include government websites, such as the U.S. Census Bureau or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; online databases, such as ProQuest or LexisNexis; and scholarly search engines, such as Google Scholar or JSTOR."

So these are public websites, open source websites, and government agencies (in some cases). But AI and the machine learning algorithms are currently not leveraging your content...yet.

Just in the past week Microsoft announced that they are going to be utilizing ChatGPT within the Bing search results, and though this is not public yet, in the demo the showcase real time "data" being utilizes, with attribution to the websites it used for the information in small, obscure links below the content.

As a content creator, this is not going to be good enough and there are going to be implications to AI engines using businesses content, for their own financial gains and uses.

So how will companies like OpenAI, and coming soon Google Bard, leverage real time content, with appropriate attribution to the original source of the content where they can get full benefit from their content creation efforts?

Love to hear your thoughts and personal insights!

Login
Create Your Free Wealthy Affiliate Account Today!
icon
4-Steps to Success Class
icon
One Profit Ready Website
icon
Market Research & Analysis Tools
icon
Millionaire Mentorship
icon
Core “Business Start Up” Training

Recent Comments

108

I think publishers could still be rewarded by for example, Adsense counting hits by AI bots on a pay-per-hit basis. If the data is scraped from a website to compile an answer to a ChatGPT query, it will count as a compensatory token, and the original author will get a commission payment.

Dave

This could be a potential solution, the monetization model may change slightly, or drastically, but them making attribution to rely on their own internal payment model is probably not going to stand up in terms of the legality of that.

Fascinating developments with Ai... but here's the thing...

Ai is spitting out information from across the web... basically learning... and maybe giving minimal attribution to the source...

But are not bloggers or affiliate marketers doing the same thing...

Bloggers do 'research' about a subject they know nothing about (some bloggers) and they gather information online from other websites... and then 're-write' the content in their own words... and claim this 'new' content as their own.

It seems to me that Ai is just doing this same process... and getting better and faster at doing so.

And like all technology... it will inherently improve... and eventually... Ai will replace bloggers or 'content creators'... just like 'self-checkout-machines' are replacing grocery store cashiers today.

Seems to me that we will all need a back-up-plan to replace our blogging income.

Yes, there is that argument. But humans that are good at researching and writing, are going to be able to produce better content (that is the argument anyways) than an AI engine. AI doesn't understand facts, or bias, which is going to become problematic...not to say it won't get better.

EVERY single piece of content ever written, was built off of ideas or influence from somewhere. Every great author, every great columnist, every great blogger...takes information and education, and then puts it down into writing.

AI is not going to replace human content, because it will rely on human content. There are certain types of content and this comes down to search intent...if someone is looking for "how to make money online", that is a topic that you would probably want to research, and find credible sources.

AI can deliver some ideas, but doesn't have the "trust". You are not going to just trust what it spits out.

However, for answers to questions that are easy responses like "what is the population of canada", "what is the stock symbol for Apple", "when was the WW2 started", "what are 5 baby products that have been banned in last 50 years"...AI can fulfill those with relative ease and Google is already delivering many of those through their rich snippets with PROPER attribution.

Not trying to be a wet rag... but the focus on Google is not where the action is...

Satya Nadella - Microsoft CEO is on the cusp of Ai and challenging Google quite successfully... so investors do agree...

Mr. Nadella says things like: 'search' is the most profitable category on the planet... excited for users to have choice... barriers to 'knowledge work' will come down... Bing & Ai have nothing to lose... Google has everything to lose...

Microsoft (Mr. Nadela) is on the march to take over search and put Ai technology front and center...

The death nail to all of this... Microsoft is in development and at the forefront... of the audio version of Ai... making Ai an audio assistant in 'search results' using voice synthesis technology... if there is a patent... watch out...

Imagine not having to 'read' search results anymore... but Ai reading YOU search results...

How would you get visitors to click on your links if the visitor never has to click to your blog or website...

Microsoft is way ahead of all of our concerns...

I'm still plugin away... but planning ahead...

There's already some chatter in the Mediavine group about blocking search engine bots. Mostly from bloggers who get most of their traffic from social of course, but you're right. This will be a significant problem.

Few people will create content if they can't monetize it or get compensated in some way. We can't afford to.

And those who create it for other platforms will find ways of preventing search from profiting from their work.

Sites like Quora, Reddit, Medium, LinkedIn, Facebook, etc., will also block their content from being crawled.

Search doesn't exist without content creators.

They can survive from the data they've already crawled for a while but fast-forward a few years. With outdated and, at best, thin content to pull information from, people will start looking for alternative ways to find the information they need.

Their only option will be to create all the new content themselves, whether it's reviews, tutorials, case studies, and information about new movies, music, books, software, other products and services in every niche imaginable... as well as things like new sporting rules and regulations, updated medical information, scientific discoveries and on and on...

... or they'll have to illegally data-mine content from digital publications that are actively trying to stop them from doing it. Which will likely be all of them.

But they're smart enough to know this. Google knows it, which is why they've only toyed with things like rich snippets but have never gone all-in on content scraping.

Just my two cents :-)

Search doesn't exist without content creators, but content creators don't exist without an audience or a profitability model.

Sites like quora rely a great deal on Google delivering their content within search. That is where they get a bulk of the traffic from, I know every time

So if Quora blocks Google from sending them traffic, they won't get traffic, and their business will be in trouble. But also, if Google doesn't give content creators benefit, then people won't create content and people won't rely on their search for useful information, and they won't make money...so it is a catch 22.

I think Google is going to implement this much more elegance, as they have to consider the bulk of their business revenue relies on search, content creators, and advertising revenue.

Bing on the other hand, is trying to disrupt and I feel they are going to be very careless with their attribution for content creators, and are going to be focused on replacing conventional "research" by providing the results.

Google will come out on top, and if people are not getting attribution properly or benefit from Bing, they will exclude their content from their search and there will be an influx of lawsuits.

Great insights here Jay and thanks for sharing your ideas!

Google is not the only player in the search space... Google I would say is becoming insignificant... a relic...

(watch out for microsoft and bing... no joke)

People often forget that Google is a business which means they are in this for profit... (no problem)... so if they can strike deals with smaller venues... such as reddit, quora, linkdin, facebook... to have access to their data... then these venues would most likely say 'CHACHING'...

When WE as 'content creators' post whatever on these smaller venues... we lose all ownership of that content... it's in their TOS...

Which means that these smaller venues can repurpose all that data... including your written content and your image and photo content... all of it...

Face it... we have all been set up for the BIG BAMBOOZLE...

I'm just wondering, if you have proprietary information in a program you created and you are sharing this program on a subscription website could you click the "No Follow" link and not have this information crawled by the search engines? If AI gets its information from crawled websites they wouldn't get all of your research. I'm just not sure if they crawl every page anyways even if you click the "No Follow".

One thing is for sure, if the big money financed it, it's not in our best interests. There are many brillant people here so I'm sure we will find out the best practices in the future. The key is probably to stay flexible and be ready to change.
Veronica

Of course. If you have a membership site, often times you will lock down much of that content behind the website back office...so that it won't be available or indexable. So it would be locked down.

Of course, you are the owner of your content and you control whether or not it gets indexed in search engines. If you don't want it there, you have the right to make sure it isn't there.

Keep Your Eye Open...

There is no point living in a fuddy duddy peppermint candy world cuz it does not exist...

I say what I say to bring awareness...

Your last point is sharp... (but I would omit the 'probably')

'The key is to remain flexible and be ready to change'...

Appropriate attribution to content creators will definitely be a real complicated challenge, as every assumed data fed to AI has still been done by humans. Plagiarism will really play a significant factor in all this. How do you regulate it? Where do you draw the line?

It will be an interesting development as AI has truly offered a lot of benefits. We utilize benefits from Jaaxy, alphabet soupX, and Niche Finder. But when it comes to content creation, how would it play out?

Cheers,
Maria🌹

P.S.
Your hat stands out Kyle ~ worthy of admiration! 😊

Well the thing is AI creates content that is not plagiarized, it is all 100% unique content. So I don't think that will be a thing, and I guess the question is that Google in a sense is already delivering results via AI through RichSnippets, with a relatively small citation below...but if you click it, it takes you to the actual content.

What happens when they curate an answer from MANY sources, that we do not know yet or what the attribution will look like with that.

Quality content will always be valuable in some way or another, and Google will continue to reward it in some way or another. I think this is an exciting time if any, not one we need to worry about because with change, there are plenty of new opportunities.

See more comments

Login
Create Your Free Wealthy Affiliate Account Today!
icon
4-Steps to Success Class
icon
One Profit Ready Website
icon
Market Research & Analysis Tools
icon
Millionaire Mentorship
icon
Core “Business Start Up” Training