@Bumblefish @Quantensalat @darkuncle @gregeganSF Ah, I get it.
They're going to "pivot their business model" to "content generation".
But the scientists are the ones who provide the revenue, on both sides. Has anyone done a simple state machine diagram showing how money is supposed to flow in this shiny new world they're envisioning?
Let's say you replace the scientists with "agentic AI". Right now the scientists are both the creator and the customer. The creators are a net income source (APCs on papers, and provide free content, review, and editing services). The publishing house provides formatting, file conversion, storage, access, indexing, hosting, and publicity. The customers are a net income source (via subscription fees, open access agreements, and purchases).
If you replace the creators with in-house AI, you lose APC revenue, you need to create a new cost center to pay for the AI, and your customers no longer need your product. It's not like the companies training the LLMs have a good track record of honoring copyright, and the utility of training on LLM output is limited. The scientists-as-creators will be replaced in this scenario, so who will pay to read the output?
I struggle with business. So much of it seems to be based around shared delusions.
