141–150 of 197 posts
More signal that the open-weight models should be our destiny as an industry. These proprietary models are being used to usher in more surveillance and gatekeeping across the industry.
Couple years ago the West was complaining about surveillance and scoring system of citizens in China (or was making fun of it) Seems like US wants to get ahead on this and be #1 Also Sam Altman will love this idea, because he already tried it with Worldcoin
> Couple years ago the West was complaining about surveillance and scoring system of citizens in China (or was making fun of it) Comparing a private company's service to something run and maintained by an entire government on their population is disingenuous, to say the least.
I should be worried about this, but Anthropic's products are a paid product. You can't use them without providing some identifying information, unless you're going out of your way to provide them inaccurate information. I generally dislike services which require this level of identity verification but also, so far, those have mostly been freemium services and community tools. And I dislike gating those communities. I…
I have no problem paying my groceries with my credit card, but I'd rather not give them a copy of my passport...
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/oct/09/hack-age-verif...
Countries such as Canada are in the process of implementing regulations to prevent repeats of the Tumbler Ridge incident. A disturbed person was basically attaboy'd by AI into a mass shooting. The discussions this person had with OpenAI's AI triggered some alarm bells at OpenAI, but they did nothing about them. If future shooters were to simply use AI chatbots under assumed names, there wouldn't be much AI companies could do about it, except maybe change their bots to stop offering mindless affirmation. At the same time, there is a move by multiple governments around the world to ban children from using AI. You can't meet that legal requirement without age verification.
On the other hand, even Americans don't trust their own corporations with their personal data. People outside of the U.S. are even less trusting thanks to the completely amoral nature of the present U.S. administration and their steadfast opposition to any kind of sensible regulation.
The chickens are coming home to roost.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And we are definitely not going to put our users on a watch list DB and send their data to the government? And how do we prevent Chinese companies from training on our open AI models and offering their models for free?
How does Red Hat prevent Chinese companies from producing a Linux distribution for free? They don't. And yet they still exist.
https://www.ibm.com/policy/contributions-and-expenditures
Their biggest customer is the US federal government, taken in aggregate across agencies, IBM is one of the largest federal IT contractors, and deep public-sector and financial-services contracts in the US make it IBM's single largest national market. No individual commercial company comes close to the government's aggregate spend.
Now, equivalent product, another company, they want to sell to the government twice cheaper, can they ? nope, it will be IBM winning.
Furthermore, according to the lobbyists, China = evil but they forget that a lot of software contains Chinese code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Couple years ago the West was complaining about surveillance and scoring system of citizens in China (or was making fun of it) Comparing a private company's service to something run and maintained by an entire government on their population is disingenuous, to say the least.
Why is that any different? What’s to stop that company sharing information with the government?
Because one is a private company that people can choose to use or avoid. The other is a government that can force things upon people. How are they the same in any way?
You know many companies check ID, right? You submit ID for a lot of activities. This isn't a new concept that Anthropic invented.
More signal that the open-weight models should be our destiny as an industry. These proprietary models are being used to usher in more surveillance and gatekeeping across the industry.
They are not going to let open weights models with zero restrictions exist dude. They will be regulated like guns, or probably closer to nerve gas or enriched uranium.
If programming requires LLM/AI then regulation by government is needed to stop this overreach, which has the primary goal of banning you permanently forever making sure you can never come back to programming, in the event some AI in their system decides you have done something “wrong”.
Agreed. Fortunately for all, clankers aren't required at all to program.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How could it not? I get the whole fear of AI making robots and going anti-human, but after using the tech for a few months now that seems too absurd.
How can it end well, when it's mostly owned / controlled by narcistic billionaires who would love to eradicate anyone who so much as looks at them sideways? And who view "mass population reduction" and "I'll get to be a king in my castle, served by peons who depend on my favor to live" as the most desirable outcome of AGI?!? If even one of these had pledge that all profit goes to end world hunger, cancer research, et…
Why on earth would you want to siphon off the proceeds of AI development to (ok my bias is strong here- mostly corrupt) "ideals" like world hunger and cancer research (that probably get more dollars annually than the sum of actual profit any of these companies will ever get). That would just instantly kill the ability to improve AI at all, and the world could possibly be better for a few months?
Couple years ago the West was complaining about surveillance and scoring system of citizens in China (or was making fun of it) Seems like US wants to get ahead on this and be #1 Also Sam Altman will love this idea, because he already tried it with Worldcoin
The US is behind other democracies which have required photo id for social media and other content. And even if I disagree with these laws, surely you jest that showing a proof of age is not the same thing as surveilling and scoring.