Live data from Hacker News

“We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

twitter.com

261–270 of 742 posts

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#261
post #87

[flagged]

Smartphones are mostly Chinese now (except for iPhones and Samsung).

Apple and Samsung are ~40-50% of the global market, depending on the source. Saying that smartphones are mostly from Chinese companies isn't accurate. And Samsung and Apple are gaining market share, while the major Chinese brands are losing market share.

https://www.idc.com/promo/smartphone-market-share/

https://gs.statcounter.com/vendor-market-share/mobile/worldw...

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#262
post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, so mass theft is okay as long as American companies are doing it

copyright infringement is not theft, even if right holders often claim it is. part of the definition of theft is that the original owner is deprived of it, which does not apply to copyright infringement. You can only argue with damages from the perspective of potential profits, still not theft though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft

So having tons of AIs quoting various literary works and reproducing knock-offs of them has a positive effect on those books' sales?

I think you're wrong: there is absolutely damage to the authors and publishers from what the AI companies have done.

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#264
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, what? > Distillation is not illegal by every definition of the word Note that Anthropic (and USG) alleges [0] not only that Kimi was distilled, but that they actively circumvented measures intended to stop distillation. There are multiple ways that's illegal, including: - Civil breach of contract. Anthropic's TOS explicitly say you can't do what Kimi is alleged to have done. - Economic espionage: 18 U.S.C. §1831…

I do agree that two wrongs don't make a right, the terms of service generally gives cooperation the power to sever the contract, but it does not make things illegal in the literal sense. The illegality usually comes from widescale fraud which includes accessing services you are banned from accessing. When I said "Does this matter?" I specially meant that distillation in itself, the data you get from distillation is f…

> The illegality usually comes from widescale fraud which includes accessing services you are banned from accessing.

Agree, and this is exactly what Anthropic is alleging.

> data you get from distillation is first and foremost not owned by anthropic nor is it copyrightable. If a user willingly gives up their anthropic reasoning data/traces that is 100% legal no matter what the "terms of service" say as it's not enforceable and would fall apart in court.

It's important to note this is NOT what happened. Anthropic was able to trace data directly back to employees at the company: "We attributed the campaign through request metadata, which matched the public profiles of senior Moonshot staff."

> none of the quoted laws apply here since no trade information is stolen

There is a lot of work showing Kimi models produce similar outputs to Anthropic models, which constitutes trade information. This is not dissimilar to past and ongoing IP suits against Anthropic and OpenAI by showing the models would recreate images of Mickey Mouse/NYT articles etc.

For the record, I'm a researcher myself and I'm well aware how competent the researchers are at the open-source labs/how much they've contributed. But that's not at issue here, my disagreement with you is specific to your arguments about legality; you're conflating what you think should be legal with what actually is legal.

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#265

Does this matter? Distillation is not illegal by every definition of the word. There are millions of samples available on huggingface and models explicitely trained on output produced by fable. There has been no action taken against them. Another example is that it appears that the upper limit of what you can do is ultimately dependent on people working on the model, otherwise grok would be a LOT more competitive pre…

Perhaps even more importantly, the current frontier LLM models are self-admittedly the product of enormous quantities of copyright infringement and even less savory inputs, so calling them out for distilling the fruit of that tainted tree reads as highly hypocritical at best.

While I agree on a moral level, I think there is a distinction to be made. Training a SOTA model takes a huge amount of resources and expertise so the people doing the training are adding a lot of value along the way. I think this is much less true for distillation (which is kind of the whole point).

ed: to clarify, I totally agree that a huge chunk of the value in LLMs is coming from the source material. My point was just that training an LLM takes more resources and expertise than distilling from an existing LLM so I don't think the equivalence between training and distilling is entirely justified.

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#266

Is this a surprise, I think history has proven that the Chinese technology theft is part of their strategy. They let the American tax payer or "The West" shoulder the cost and then steal it. Waiting for the whataboutism....junk away...

It wasnt until 1891 that America extended copyright protection to foreign authors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Copyright_Act_of...

IP "theft" has been a longstanding part of any developing nation's economy.

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps even more importantly, the current frontier LLM models are self-admittedly the product of enormous quantities of copyright infringement and even less savory inputs, so calling them out for distilling the fruit of that tainted tree reads as highly hypocritical at best.

This is why I don't give a shit that this is happening. It's actually kind of funny to me.

Unless you’re from mainland China, you should.

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, so mass theft is okay as long as American companies are doing it

Moreover, reading a copyrighted book and learning from it is not theft.

Machines are not humans.

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#269

Does this matter? Distillation is not illegal by every definition of the word. There are millions of samples available on huggingface and models explicitely trained on output produced by fable. There has been no action taken against them. Another example is that it appears that the upper limit of what you can do is ultimately dependent on people working on the model, otherwise grok would be a LOT more competitive pre…

It is presumably against their ToS.

Re: “We have information that Moonshot distilled Fable for the development of K3”

#270
post #55

So what is the issue here? Distilling is still fair, on the same level like Anthropic scraped copyright protected material for their training. So here robbers are blaming robbers? These claims are just pointless, everytime

"You are trying to kidnap what I have rightfully stolen!"

Except it’s not just a dump of the internet, which Moonshot also did themselves (and probably used even more pirated content as laws in China are different without any recourse for the entire world). I don’t know why this is so unclear to folks.
Post reply on HN