It is pertinent to acknowledge that the issue of copyright, which evidently perturbs the author profoundly, has already been expounded upon by others. As I previously noted in a post dated August 25th, about a compelling article featured in the widely recognized The Economist, alludes to an inexorable outcome wherein enterprises benefiting from generative AI models will be compelled, for better or worse, to remunerate creators for the utilization of their copyrighted materials.
Regrettably, the aforementioned professor neglected to acknowledge or even hint at the positive facets of artificial intelligence. Notably absent from the discourse are mentions of its potential for substantially reducing the cost of education or its role in the dramatic enhancement of medical diagnostics, marked by an astounding 0% margin of error in contrast to the 7% error rates prevalent even among the world's foremost experts. Unfortunately, AI's capacity to contribute to resolving critical medical challenges was also unaddressed.
PS - It is worth highlighting that unlike its free counterpart, GPT-3.5, the premium version, available for a monthly subscription fee of $20 (GPT-4), shows enhanced versatility. This upgraded version possesses the capability to analyze not only textual data but also images and numerical information depicted in Excel charts. Additionally, it exhibits a substantially augmented problem-solving capacity, encompassing domains as diverse as the field of Law, as evidenced by a presentation delivered by two professors from the William & Mary Law School "A Demonstration of the Differences Between ChatGPT-4 and 3.5 that Impact Legal Research and Writing"
