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

AI is a business model stress test

dri.es

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 361 posts

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#291

Post by jaynate »

ChicagoDave wrote: post #281

This goes way deeper than open source businesses. Imagine I’m a company just big enough to entertain adopting Salesforce for CRM. It’s a big chunk of money, but our sales can absorb the pain. With GenAI as an enterprise architect, one of the options I’m now recommending is to create a custom CRM for our business and skip the bloated enterprise SaaS platform. We can gather CRM requirements fast, build fast, and delive…

>> Our sales people can make feature requests

I can tell you with near-100% certainty. This isn’t what you want to happen. Disaster in the making.

Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. There is very little competitive advantage to be gained from this type of effort in most companies.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#292

Post by dev1ycan »

2-5 years from now after the AI bubble bursts, and they are trying to rent us $300 PCs since every component is 5x the price, we will look back at all the damage and copyright law that was completely bypassed and ignored when it was convenient, after all those years of claiming evil China "stole" from companies (only to then pass laws where they can virtually steal anything they want, even utilizing private repositories on Github that they acquired by buying the site, completely ignoring the licenses)...

Or how Meta downloaded 70tb+ of books and then got law enforcement to nuke libgen and z-lib to create a "moat", and all our tools start dying/disappearing because the developers are laid off since an AI "search engine" just regurgitates it, THEN and only then will most people understand the mistake that this was.

Let's not even begin with what Grok just recently did to women on X, completely unacceptable, I really, really wish for the EU to grow some and take a stand, it is clear that China is just as predatory as America and both are willing to burn it all in order to get a non existent lead in non existent "technology" that snake oil salesmen have convinced 80 year olds in government that is the next "revolution".

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#293

Post by dangoodmanUT »

drivebyhooting wrote: post #4

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.

But it’s not theft, because you’re not redistributing. It’s allowed, just like humans are allowed to learn from copyrighted content.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#294

Post by amelius »

dangoodmanUT wrote: post #293
drivebyhooting wrote: post #4

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.

But it’s not theft, because you’re not redistributing. It’s allowed, just like humans are allowed to learn from copyrighted content.

> just like humans are allowed to learn from copyrighted content

humans learning : machines learning == whale swimming : submarine swimming

It's not the exact 100% same thing. Therefore you cannot base any rights on it.

If you still don't buy it, consider this analogy:

killing a human vs. destroying a machine

Thank god that we're not using your line of thinking here.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#295

Post by TrackerFF »

dangoodmanUT wrote: post #293
drivebyhooting wrote: post #4

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.

But it’s not theft, because you’re not redistributing. It’s allowed, just like humans are allowed to learn from copyrighted content.

Sure. But if I see listen to some song, and copy it, and release it, I could get sued. Even if I claim that I'm merely inspired by the original content - the court doesn't care.

You don't need to redistribute the original material, it's enough that you just copied it.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#296

Post by sanderjd »

ChicagoDave wrote: post #281

This goes way deeper than open source businesses. Imagine I’m a company just big enough to entertain adopting Salesforce for CRM. It’s a big chunk of money, but our sales can absorb the pain. With GenAI as an enterprise architect, one of the options I’m now recommending is to create a custom CRM for our business and skip the bloated enterprise SaaS platform. We can gather CRM requirements fast, build fast, and delive…

Yep agreed, totally changes build vs buy decisions. Which is not to say it's always "build" now, but the calculation has changed.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#297

Post by sanderjd »

Roark66 wrote: post #264

>"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've been doing exactly that since AI came out :-D You absolutely can prompt your way to 3.5 nines of uptime (even more), but you need to know what you're doing and correct it. Even very well aligned models lik…

The author meant that you can't just tell a model "do everything that is necessary to achieve 99.95% uptime". It can certainly help you brainstorm issues and solve them, but you can't "just" prompt it.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#298

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

wnjenrbr wrote: post #64
iterateoften wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stopped writing open source projects on github because why put a bunch of work into something for others to train off of without any regard for the original projects

Good, we don’t want code that people are possessive of, in the software commons. The attitude that you are concerned about what people do with your output means that nobody should touch your output, too big a risk of drama. We don’t own anything we release to the world.

"Good riddance" is a pretty lousy position to take re: volunteer work. It should be: "how can we fix this?"

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#299

Post by testing22321 »

senko wrote: post #270
drivebyhooting wrote: post #4

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.

I support your right to have an opinion, but in my opinion, thank God this is just your opinion. Copyright, as practiced in late 20 and this century, is a tool for big corps to extract profits from actual artists, creators, and consumers of this art[0] equally. Starving artists do not actually benefit. Look at Spotify (owned and squeezed by record labels) giving 70% of the revenue to the record labels, while artists…

So you don’t like big corps getting ever richer by hiding behind copyright.

How about my books?

I’ve published a few, make maybe $500 a month from them.

Is it fine for the LLMs to rip them off?

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#300

Post by Larrikin »

venndeezl wrote: post #115
drivebyhooting wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excuse me, but even if in principle of “information wants to be free”, the actual outcome of LLMs is the opposite of democratizing information and access. It completely centralizes accesses, censorship, and profits in the hands of a few mega corporations. It is completely against the spirit of information wants to be free. Using that catch phrase in protection of mega corps is a travesty.

LLMs are just a concept, an abstraction. A data type for storing data. The actual problem is political. Has nothing to do with LLMs.

Those are meaningless words when you know the discussion is about LLMs taking in people's intellectual property and selling it back.
Post reply on HN