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

The Kimi K3 Moment

stephen.bochinski.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 644 posts

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#221

Post by Maxatar »

jstummbillig wrote: post #198
athrowaway3z wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People infringe on Anthropics IP No. Authors do not infringe on IP when they read another's book, nor should the lumber company be able to dictate how I use planks and if I can resell them if i'm done with them. You're framing it as if the added value of the author or lumber company, awards them consideration when somebody uses the products to create more value. IP law was always a big mess, and these questions cros…

It's more simple: They infringe on the IP by way of violating the ToS. If you violate ToS and the company suffers financial harm, they usually can (usually) sue you in civil court for damages.

Violating terms of service and violating IP rights are two independent violations. Neither implies the other.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#222

Post by jdthedisciple »

jwr wrote: post #73

Well, there is the small issue of privacy policy: Kimi will train their models on your interactions if you use their subscriptions, and only with direct API usage (billed at API prices) they say they won't. Whether you trust that is another matter. Those things do make a difference to some of us, even though nothing is black and white. In my case, I'll probably want to wait until other providers appear through OpenRo…

> Kimi will train their models on your interactions

I find these kinds of concerns increasingly silly: most of the input to these models will be ... previous output from the very same models, alongside the occasional half-assed human command to fix something and "make zero mistakes". Who cares if they train on that? Let them, if it makes their future models better!

99% of users are not working on any special IP to worry about that.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#223

Post by anon373839 »

nickysielicki wrote: post #33

Regardless of whether they achieved parity via distillation, or whether they got here via independently constructing a model from scratch, it was always going to end this way for the frontier American labs. Distillation “attacks” are not attacks. The frontier labs “distilled” all existing human written knowledge into their models, there was always going to be a second class lab that would distill that model into a ch…

I strongly agree with the premise that distillation is not an “attack”.

But that said: K3 is not a distilled version of Fable or Sol. Fable has been barely available and Sol was just released! Moreover, K3 is superior to both models in some domains, according to user scoring on the Arena.

API distillation can’t give you these results anyway. All it is useful for is bootstrapping RL in new domains to get past the “cold start” problem faster. By far, what matters more is the quality and variety of RL environments the model learns from.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#224

Post by nonethewiser »

athrowaway3z wrote: post #60
jstummbillig wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Distillation “attacks” are not attacks. If "distillation attacks" happen, we have to conclude there is some value add in what model labs do. Regardless of how we feel about using existing human knowledge in the way they currently do, it's simply impractical to infer that everything that happens downstream of LLMs can not be an attack on some IP because of it. So both things can be true: a) People infringe on Anthro…

>People infringe on Anthropics IP No. Authors do not infringe on IP when they read another's book, nor should the lumber company be able to dictate how I use planks and if I can resell them if i'm done with them. You're framing it as if the added value of the author or lumber company, awards them consideration when somebody uses the products to create more value. IP law was always a big mess, and these questions cros…

>Authors do not infringe on IP when they read another's book

Are the distillers reading books or are they building models?

If anthropic is providing no value they can just build from scratch. But obviously distilling is easier. Hes saying thats the value they add.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#225

Post by xyzsparetimexyz »

qalmakka wrote: post #54

I never truly understood what the intended business model around LLMs was. Get them widespread through cheap pricing and then jacking it up? Being the only ones that had a viable product so to get the ability to extract as much value as you want from AI? I don't understand how a product that: - is interfaced with and is deeply linked to natural language, so everything you produce (sessions, history, etc) is in Markdo…

It's fairly simple. Sell GPU compute + extra margins as only some GPUs can load the models + extra margins based on how much better closed source models are from open source ones + hopefully reduced cost due to batching

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#226

Post by gpm »

sensanaty wrote: post #219
gpm wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you've basically got the legal theory. Training a neural network isn't prohibited by copyright law so if you can legally get your hands on something (e.g. by sending a GET request to someone with rights to serve the contents of their web page, or by buying a book) without signing a contract to not train on it, you can train on it. But the American AI companies only let you query their models if you first sign…

> to someone with rights to serve the contents Now THAT'S doing some heavy lifting lmao. The vast, vast, VAST majority of the original datasets were from pirated books and the like. Also, arguably a robots.txt is the exact mechanism to follow to do the mass GET-ing, yet the AI cos choose time and time and time again to simply ignore it and be as abusive as they possibly fucking can

> The vast, vast, VAST majority of the original datasets were from pirated books and the like

And there's been significant legal consequences as a result

> Also, arguably a robots.txt is the exact mechanism to follow to do the mass GET-ing

You're free to argue this of course, but the courts have largely rejected it already pre LLMs. See for example hiQ Labs v. LinkedIn

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#227

Post by lossolo »

petilon wrote: post #24

The current administration's immigration policy isn't helping. This wouldn't have happened 10 years ago because the US was this city on the hill that everyone wanted to immigrate to. Talented Asian researchers would have immigrated to the US and China would be deprived of talent.

Your comment feels like an outdated brain drain model where talented Chinese researchers naturally want to leave China and the only question is whether the US lets them in.

That may have been closer to reality 10-20 years ago, China is a different country now, what I mean by that is they offer research funding, they have huge digital behemoths (alibaba, tencent, huawei, bytedance etc), large scale deployment opportunities and prestigious careers. Many graduates return because the opportunity set is attractive and they want to return, it's not just because US immigration policy pushed them out. Some also want to contribute to their own country's technological progress (which is a normal motivation btw), like probably you are also a patriot and want your country to succeed.

So, really, China's AI progress is not mainly the result of America failing to absorb every talented Chinese researcher. China has built a domestic ecosystem capable of producing and keeping top talent itself. I feel like a lot of Americans do not understand this.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#228

Post by codedokode »

tristanj wrote: post #192
andriy_koval wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Us models didnt pay for licenses too

That is incorrect. Anthropic paid $1.5 billion in compensation to copyright holders for use of their content in training data. OpenAI pays hundreds of millions per year across 150+ licensing deals for access to copyrighted data. Meta and Alphabet have similar arrangements. Under the settlement, Anthropic was forced to delete the pirated data they were training on. Chinese labs can still train on pirated data. I doubt…

They only paid when they got caught. And not to everyone.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#229

Post by nonethewiser »

ForHackernews wrote: post #204
jstummbillig wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more simple: They infringe on the IP by way of violating the ToS. If you violate ToS and the company suffers financial harm, they usually can (usually) sue you in civil court for damages.

You can't violate ToS you never agreed to. If I use pirate Claude through a third-party reseller, I have entered no agreement with Anthropic.

Api key?

I guess you could steal them but thats a whole other issue.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#230

Post by jdthedisciple »

api wrote: post #186

The dumb efforts by the US AI industry to use fear mongering for regulatory capture will hand dominance to China and others. In a few years there will be Mythos level open weight models hosted by the lowest bidder anyway.

> In a few years there will be Mythos level open weight

At the rate things are moving I'd expect that to happen much sooner.

In fact: Somebody, right now as we speak, is most likely already working on training the next best open source model.

I just thought about that recently too, then Kimi K3 came out, and I thought: Yea, I'm not surprised. Just a matter of time now...

Post reply on HN