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

The state of open source AI

stateofopensource.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 379 posts

Re: The state of open source AI

#91

Post by wongarsu »

dosinga wrote: post #35

> Mozilla exists because one company tried to own the front door to the web, and an open community rose up to make sure it never could. I'd say that the front door to the web is pretty much owned by Google and Apple at this point given Firefox current marketshare. And maybe that's enough, maybe a future where a low percentage of open models keep the rest of the system honest but that doesn't seem the argument of this…

It's also just a very cherry-picked framing

Mozilla exists because one company owned the front door to the web, and another company abused their market position to push their free (as in beer) browser. Mozilla is the phoenix rising from the ashes of that first company.

Then another company came along, abused their market position to push their free browser, demolished Firefox's market share but keep handing them cash to avoid the appearance of a monopoly

Re: The state of open source AI

#92

Post by ifdefdebug »

bel8 wrote: post #72
dosinga wrote: post #35

> Mozilla exists because one company tried to own the front door to the web, and an open community rose up to make sure it never could. I'd say that the front door to the web is pretty much owned by Google and Apple at this point given Firefox current marketshare. And maybe that's enough, maybe a future where a low percentage of open models keep the rest of the system honest but that doesn't seem the argument of this…

Mozilla exists because Google gives them billions to keep Google as default search engine.

And to keep around a concurrent browser with full adblock abilities so they can cripple their own without too much of an outcry.

Re: The state of open source AI

#94

Post by paulddraper »

babblingfish wrote: post #6

Speculation: open models is what will kill Anthropic and OpenAI. Hyperscalers can run the models without a licensing fee. Apple can make them smaller and put them on the device. The frontier models are an edge and a liability. They're astronomically expensive to train. Without them, their models will fade into obscurity. Their marketing depends on people believing the models are meaningfully different, as people have…

> Their marketing depends on people believing the models are meaningfully different, as people have sweatily argued on this forum.

They are noticeably different. Benchmarks, anecdotes, all say the same thing.

Now, is a ~6 month lead actually worth 1 gajillion dollars? Maybe not.

Re: The state of open source AI

#96

Post by s3p »

Catloafdev wrote: post #68

As someone that's generally for the proliferation of open models, I want to take this seriously, but it's really difficult when it was clearly written by AI. I guess they fired whoever used to write copy for these things. Edit: to be clear, I'm not trying to just dunk on them, I think it's actively hurting their own point to do this, and counter-productive when people can easily clock it - it makes some percent of th…

Agreed. Maybe we've become jaded to the writing style of AI, but it reads as disingenuous.

Re: The state of open source AI

#98

Post by paulddraper »

hughw wrote: post #53

Is the CTO a bot?

> Open weights are no longer a compromise. They are where the work happens.

> They require owning the layers above it — the harness, the memory, the permission model — while those layers are still open.

> Open isn't a vendor choice. It's a sovereignty choice.

Re: The state of open source AI

#99

Post by sph »

LorenDB wrote: post #80
sph wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it work if people flock to open models but they're too expensive to train? What is the financial incentive to do so? I seem to understand open models are mostly coming from China, and the benefit of training and releasing them for 'free' is a powerful geopolitical weapon against the Western/US economy that at this point depends on OpenAI & co. to succeed. Will the West make open models illegal?

"You wouldn't download an LLM"

You wouldn't crash the stock market by preferring Chinese models.

Re: The state of open source AI

#100

Post by xkcd-sucks »

elorant wrote: post #75
babblingfish wrote: post #6

Speculation: open models is what will kill Anthropic and OpenAI. Hyperscalers can run the models without a licensing fee. Apple can make them smaller and put them on the device. The frontier models are an edge and a liability. They're astronomically expensive to train. Without them, their models will fade into obscurity. Their marketing depends on people believing the models are meaningfully different, as people have…

Eventually they will kill the hyperscalers too because of privacy issues. It's better for a company to pay an uprfont cost and then run everything on premise that uploading their entire codebase to a third party service.

Would that require a watershed event to clearly establish the importance/risk of privacy though? For example, right now it seems like most big software companies w/ strong security process are comfortable uploading entire codebases to Israeli cybersecurity firms for vulnerability scanning compliance purposes
Post reply on HN