Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 845 posts

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#231

Post by yadaeno »

sitkack wrote: post #224
api wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI lobbied for restrictive rules, and now they want an "out" but only for themselves. Absolute naked regulatory capture.

Also textbook Fascism. Trump should have a Most Favored Corporate status, each corporation in a vertical can compete for favor and the one that does gets to be "teacher's pet" when it comes to exemptions, contracts, trade deals, priority in resource right access, etc.

Can you explain why this is associated with fascism specifically, and not any other form of government which has high levels of oligarchical corruption (like North Korea, Soviet Russia, etc).

I am not saying you’re wrong, but please educate me why is this form of corruption/cronyism is unique to fascism?

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#232

Post by henriquez »

hnlurker22 wrote: post #206
api wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI lobbied for restrictive rules, and now they want an "out" but only for themselves. Absolute naked regulatory capture.

Just like when people complain about OpenAI's ill practices then they use it the most

[flagged]

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#233

Post by cogman10 »

arkadiytehgraet wrote: post #225
api wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI lobbied for restrictive rules, and now they want an "out" but only for themselves. Absolute naked regulatory capture.

I believe with regulatory capture the companies that pushed for the regulation in the first place at least comply with it (and hopefully the regulation is not worthless). This behaviour by ClosedAI is even worse: push for the regulation, then push for the exemption.

Regulatory capture is usually the company pushing for regulations that align with the business practices they already implement and would be hard for a competitor to implement. For example, a car company that wants to require all other manufactures to build and operate wind tunnels for aerodynamics testing. Or more realistically, regulations requiring 3rd party sellers for vehicles.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#234

Post by tdeck »

yadaeno wrote: post #231
sitkack wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also textbook Fascism. Trump should have a Most Favored Corporate status, each corporation in a vertical can compete for favor and the one that does gets to be "teacher's pet" when it comes to exemptions, contracts, trade deals, priority in resource right access, etc.

Can you explain why this is associated with fascism specifically, and not any other form of government which has high levels of oligarchical corruption (like North Korea, Soviet Russia, etc). I am not saying you’re wrong, but please educate me why is this form of corruption/cronyism is unique to fascism?

It might be basic, but I found the Wikipedia article to be a good place to start:

> An important aspect of fascist economies was economic dirigism,[35] meaning an economy where the government often subsidizes favorable companies and exerts strong directive influence over investment, as opposed to having a merely regulatory role. In general, fascist economies were based on private property and private initiative, but these were contingent upon service to the state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#235

Post by epistasis »

fazeirony wrote: post #214

the GOP: "states' rights! states' rights!!" also the GOP: "not those rights! only the rights we want to share"

The unspoken part was always the states' rights to do what. Which of course was all about maintaining the economic differences that they preferred. Which, you know...

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#236

Post by dragonwriter »

yadaeno wrote: post #231
sitkack wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also textbook Fascism. Trump should have a Most Favored Corporate status, each corporation in a vertical can compete for favor and the one that does gets to be "teacher's pet" when it comes to exemptions, contracts, trade deals, priority in resource right access, etc.

Can you explain why this is associated with fascism specifically, and not any other form of government which has high levels of oligarchical corruption (like North Korea, Soviet Russia, etc). I am not saying you’re wrong, but please educate me why is this form of corruption/cronyism is unique to fascism?

The private industry side of fascist corporatism is very similar to all kinds of systematic state industry cronyism, particularly in other authoritarian systems that aren't precisely fascist (and named systems of government are just idealized points on the multidimensional continuum on which actual governments are distributed, anyway), what distinguishes fascism particularly is the combination of its form of corporatism with xenophobia, militaristic nationalism, etc., not the form of corporatism alone.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#238

Post by tdeck »

hnlurker22 wrote: post #206
api wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI lobbied for restrictive rules, and now they want an "out" but only for themselves. Absolute naked regulatory capture.

Just like when people complain about OpenAI's ill practices then they use it the most

Can anyone say which of the LLM companies is the least "shady"?

If I want to use an LLM to augment my work, and don't have a massively powerful local machine to run local models, what are the best options?

Obviously I saw the news about OpenAI's head of research openly supporting war crimes, but I don't feel confident about what's up with the other companies.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#239

Post by smt88 »

henriquez wrote: post #232
hnlurker22 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like when people complain about OpenAI's ill practices then they use it the most

[flagged]

You need a big "/s" after this. Or maybe just not post it at all, because it's just value-less snark and not a substantial comment on how hypocritical and harmful OpenAI is (which they certainly are).

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#240

Post by parliament32 »

ch4s3 wrote: post #188

I'm surprised to see only one comment here addressing the issue of Chinese AI companies just flatly ignoring US copyright and IP laws/norms. I wonder if there is a viable path where we can facilitate some sort of economic remuneration for people who write and create visual art while not giving up the game to Chinese companies. This seems to be a thorny dilemma.

I'm pretty sure you can't, despite what IP holders would like you to believe. Like the last 50 years of piracy have taught us, it's effectively impossible (and probably immoral) to try to charge for copying something that's "free" to copy.

It might make more sense to update copyright laws to match reality. For a music artist, for example, pennies from Spotify mean nothing -- the majority of their revenue comes from concerts/events, merchandise, and commercial licensing of their work.

Post reply on HN