[flagged]
White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
11–20 of 65 posts
Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft is invested in OpenAI. Have they released any open weight models themselves? Apple is similarly partnering with OpenAI. Google has released nerfed versions of its Gemini models (Gemma 2B and Gemma 7B). It seems the only company truly setting an example for open weights is Meta. Hopefully the other companies realize that it’s in their best interest to do the same (as it seems Google is begrudgingly realizing…
> Microsoft is invested in OpenAI. Have they released any open weight models themselves? Do the Phi series models not count?
Sure they do. I was genuinely asking.
Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#13Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#14Would love to hear the White House explain to me what Open-Source AI is, in their own words.
This sounds sarcastic, but as is often the case the White House has quite competent people working on this who have put a lot of thought into it already: https://www.ntia.gov/federal-register-notice/2024/dual-use-f...
Unfortunately it's past the deadline for you to add your own comments on this, but I'm sure there will be future RFCs if you have thoughts.
Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? All three of those companies have an obvious and outspoken commitment to releasing models for free, they aren't trying to manipulate fear to sell a product like OpenAI.
Microsoft is invested in OpenAI. Have they released any open weight models themselves? Apple is similarly partnering with OpenAI. Google has released nerfed versions of its Gemini models (Gemma 2B and Gemma 7B). It seems the only company truly setting an example for open weights is Meta. Hopefully the other companies realize that it’s in their best interest to do the same (as it seems Google is begrudgingly realizing…
“AI” is much more than LLMs…
Not only have all three of these companies released LLM model weights, Google and Microsoft especially have released nearly countless model architectures, weights, evaluation/training/inference/etc frameworks, toolkits, etc across an extremely wide spectrum.
Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#16Would love to hear the White House explain to me what Open-Source AI is, in their own words.
This sounds sarcastic, but as is often the case the White House has quite competent people working on this who have put a lot of thought into it already: https://www.ntia.gov/federal-register-notice/2024/dual-use-f... Unfortunately it's past the deadline for you to add your own comments on this, but I'm sure there will be future RFCs if you have thoughts.
In the spirit of this pedantry I’d like to point out that the NTIA is not the White House.
Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#17Might change after getting lobbying checks from Google, Microsoft and Apple.
[flagged]
Sorry, I’m no JD Vance fan but what on earth do you mean he was installed by Silicon Valley? Who installed him, and where did they install him to? Do you mean “Silicon Valley” installed him as Trump’s VP pick? Or just that SV installed him as one of two senators from Ohio — in which case, how did they do that, and more importantly why would they choose a senator from Ohio instead of California?
I know Vance is friendly to SV but the idea that there’s some nefarious shadow council of SV tech nerds installing politicians into nebulous places without the public or opposition being generally aware of it is preposterous.
Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#18See my comment here on FBs strategic positioning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41090142
Updated link.
Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#19Would love to hear the White House explain to me what Open-Source AI is, in their own words.
Seems pretty clear to me they're using it colloquialism for freely distributed weights.
Is that "umm ackshually .." bit really worth doing here?
Open weights vs training code is not a distinction worth drawing for the average person
Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft is invested in OpenAI. Have they released any open weight models themselves? Apple is similarly partnering with OpenAI. Google has released nerfed versions of its Gemini models (Gemma 2B and Gemma 7B). It seems the only company truly setting an example for open weights is Meta. Hopefully the other companies realize that it’s in their best interest to do the same (as it seems Google is begrudgingly realizing…
“AI” is much more than LLMs… Not only have all three of these companies released LLM model weights, Google and Microsoft especially have released nearly countless model architectures, weights, evaluation/training/inference/etc frameworks, toolkits, etc across an extremely wide spectrum.
They mainly offer open tooling to help you adopt their closed-source tech (e.g. RAG frameworks) but you don't get the freedom to do what you want with the model (which is the core).
At some point, these big companies may even want to put more regulation or restrictions on their open-weights / open-source competitors. "Hey this is not validated for safety, you can use only Gemini"