The Washington Post
(Democracy Dies in Darkness)
Pay up, AI giants
Regarding Shira Ovide's Sept. 11 column, "Who's p2ring for AI in new phones? Probably you."
There is a saying that "If the product is free, then the product is you." Social media companies built this idea into their products from the beginning: They gave us their services at no charge, intending to collect data from us, and then selling that raw data or using it to sell advertising that targets us. Tech companies are transforming our personal data into gold for them, but they do not share their gold with us. That's a bargain that many people have started to ask questions about. And the rise of AI, especially AI that is built into our personal devices, makes those questions even more important.
Data is the key for AI and its development: Large language models and image generators need lots of information to learn from so they can get better at writing text and drawing pictures. AI is the most promising business right now, and tech firms are in the race to achieve supremacy. However, we are already helping those companies make a lot of money by selling ads to us, and we are now helping them develop their AI models by giving our personal data while using their free services. Every time we log into our Instagram accounts or post a picture on Facebook, we are contributing indirectly to their business profits. Without us using social media companies' services for "free," there would not be profit for them.
Therefore, if we are already basically working without receiving any compensation for the use of our personal data, why should we pay a subscription fee for the use of new AI services on our devices? Aren't AI models a technology that depends on data created by people like us?
I don't feel paying subscription fees for AI services on our devices is fair, because we are the raw material of AI products. Tech companies should start thinking about how they will compensate us for using our data to develop their AI models. I think that profit made by AI models is just in the hands of a few people. Therefore, it is crucial to think deeply about some kind of universal income, which will be a good way to compensate us economically for the use of our data and share the gold made by AI products.
Jose Carbajal Duran, Arlington
About letters to the editor
The Post welcomes letters to the editor on any subject, especially those that expand upon the ideas raised by published pieces and those that raise valuable questions about the Post's practices and choices. Letters should run no more than 400 words, be submitted only to the Post and must be published under your real name. Submit a letter.
October 30, 2024