> When the models are open source, or at least may be downloaded and used locally for no cost, that would be the users of the models.
I think there's a bit more nuance to this. The profits go to those with the ability to run these models and to those with the infrastructure (or capitol) to run said models. I'm hoping this will change and we'll see lower barriers to entry as LLMs are made more accessible over time.
> And back to the biological comparison: I learned to read (and also to code) in part from the Commodore 64 user manual, should I owe the shareholders anything for my lifetime earnings?
This is more a philosophical question than anything else. I don't think there's right or wrong answer, but in my opinion the answers we arrive at should provide as much benefit to as many people as possible.
> As I got to the end of that sentence, a thought struck me: taxes do that. And in the UK the question of if university should be funded by taxes or by the students themselves followed the same lines.
I agree with your assessment and this model lines up well with my own opinions on reasonable ways to ensure equitable benefit from AI (be it ML, LLMs, or some theoretical general AI in the future).