Nilay Patel confronts Shashir Mahotra, CEO of Superhuman (formerly Grammarly), about the 'Expert Review' AI feature that used prominent names, including Patel's, without permission for generating writing suggestions. The discussion covers the controversy, Superhuman's decision to remove the feature, and broader implications for AI's impact on creators, attribution, and the economy.
Summarized by Podsumo
Superhuman's 'Expert Review' feature in Grammarly used names of journalists and experts, like Nilay Patel, without consent to provide AI-generated writing advice, leading to a class-action lawsuit.
CEO Shashir Mahotra apologized for the 'bad feature' and removed it, but argued that the use of names was for 'attribution' and not 'impersonation,' stating the lawsuit's claims are 'without merit.'
Patel challenged Mahotra on the 'extractive' nature of AI, citing negative public perception and the uncompensated use of creators' work, while Mahotra attributed public fear primarily to job displacement.
Mahotra envisions Superhuman Go as a platform where experts can build and monetize their own AI agents, offering a 70/30 revenue split, as a new business model for creators.
The conversation drew parallels to YouTube's early copyright battles, highlighting the ongoing struggle for creators to adapt and find sustainable monetization in an evolving AI-driven digital landscape.
"I understand and respect how challenging a world it is for experts and ideogenaries these days... It deeply pained me to feel that we under delivered for them. And I really like to apologize for that."
"AI isn't there. It is only perceived as extractive. It's less beloved than ice. That's crazy to me. Do you understand that the extractive nature of AI is causing a problem for the whole industry?"
"I think when I went and talked to people about what we're doing here at Superhuman, they told me, actually, I don't really want to be fishing for pennies whenever my work gets used. I want to build connection with people."