31–40 of 361 posts
I agree somewhat but eventually these can be automated with AI as well.
A stress test on a bank doesn't actually erase the revenue and financially jeopardize the bank.
Implementing layoffs is not a stress test.
In my opinion LLMs are intellectual property theft. Just as if I started distributing copies of books. This substantially reduces the incentive for the creation of new IP. All written text, art work, etc needs to come imbued with a GPL style license: if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published.
> if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published. The problem here is enforcement. It's well known that AI companies simply pirated content in order to train their models. No amount of license really helps in that scenario.
Imagine OpenAI is required by law to list their weights on huggingface. The occasional nerd with enough GPUs can now self host.
How does this solve any tangible problems with LLMs regurgitating someone else's work?
In my opinion LLMs are intellectual property theft. Just as if I started distributing copies of books. This substantially reduces the incentive for the creation of new IP. All written text, art work, etc needs to come imbued with a GPL style license: if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published.
The moment Tailwind becomes a for-profit, commercial business, they have to duke it out just like anyone else. If the thing you sell is not defensible, it means you have a brittle business model. If I’m allowed to take Tailwind, the open source project, and build something commercial around it, I don’t see why OpenAI or Anthropic cannot.
> Value is shifting to operations: deployment, testing, rollbacks, observability. You can't prompt 99.95% uptime on Black Friday. Neither can you prompt your way to keeping a site secure, updated, and running. I agree somewhat but eventually these can be automated with AI as well.
This is completely wrong. Agents will not just be able to write code, like they do now, but will also be able to handle operations, security, continuing to check, and improve the systems, tirelessly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published. The problem here is enforcement. It's well known that AI companies simply pirated content in order to train their models. No amount of license really helps in that scenario.
The problem here is the "so what?" Imagine OpenAI is required by law to list their weights on huggingface. The occasional nerd with enough GPUs can now self host. How does this solve any tangible problems with LLMs regurgitating someone else's work?
I'm not the OP, but here's my from-the-hip answer: if weights are public, building and operating an LLM is no longer a business plan in and of itself, as anyone could operate the same LLM. Therefore companies like OpenAI will be disincentivized from simply redirecting web traffic to their own site.