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

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

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 742 posts

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

#651

Post by wasfgwp »

breppp wrote: post #467
foo12bar wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The models were built using copyrighted works, so why can't models be built using other models?

Because model output is probably far closer to software or a licensed work which possibly has greater protections than it is to copyright. There is far less possibility of fair use, it might be protected by patents, license or reverse engineering laws. In any case the laws are being written now, but I doubt these will have worse protection than software does, which has far better protections than copyright

LLM outputs are not copyrightable. At least that’s the current established legal precedent in the US. The only question is whether the user owns the copyright without significantly transforming the output but that’s not really relevant in those specific situation.

I mean otherwise it’s a very slippery slope, effectively it would give Anthropic the ownership of any code generated by its models..

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

#652

Post by wasfgwp »

breppp wrote: post #501
giaour wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I doubt these will have worse protection than software does, which has far better protections than copyright Software is protected by copyright. Some software may also be protected by patents, but last time I checked, AI generated output of any kind was not patentable.

Software is protected by the DMCA, patents, licenses, EULAs, all of those aren't there for books. I doubt new laws won't be written for model outputs. Also, if model output distillation is shown as some form of reverse engineering I assume the DMCA can apply

How is “model output distillation” different to using outputs (which are legally copyrightable) for any other purpose?

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

#653

Post by amluto »

tristanj wrote: post #585
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Moonshot more than enough time Genuine question: do you have a source for how long distilling Fable would take with preparation?

Moonshot already has at least several million exchanges distilled from Claude that they obtained over the past year https://www.anthropic.com/news/detecting-and-preventing-dist... . So they have the infrastructure already set up to do this. Re-running their existing distillation suite on the new Fable endpoint would be trivial. Given that Fable was available for 72 hours back in June, I asked GPT-5.6 Sol to estimate…

As far as I know, 100% of those Fable interactions would have had encrypted reasoning blocks, so distillation would be distinctly nontrivial even if the data were somehow available.

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

#654

Post by tristanj »

boesboes wrote: post #639
tristanj wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moonshot already has at least several million exchanges distilled from Claude that they obtained over the past year https://www.anthropic.com/news/detecting-and-preventing-dist... . So they have the infrastructure already set up to do this. Re-running their existing distillation suite on the new Fable endpoint would be trivial. Given that Fable was available for 72 hours back in June, I asked GPT-5.6 Sol to estimate…

What do you base that 1-2 million on? Sounds like complete horseshit imo

It's based on Anthropic's press release where they reveal distillation of their models by Chinese labs: https://www.anthropic.com/news/detecting-and-preventing-dist...

Moonshot AI already distilled over 3.4 million exchanges; I reached 1-2 million exchanges assuming they would like to augment or improve about half of their existing (distilled) dataset.

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

#655

Post by m4rtink »

owebmaster wrote: post #438
azinman2 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you’re from mainland China, you should.

Why so? If I'm from Europe or South America, should I hope Anthropic/Openai win?

I think it is only rational to want them to fail & to fail hard, to make an example.

To avoid future situations where money is invested on hype only with no regards to what societal disruption it causes.

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

#656

Post by tristanj »

amluto wrote: post #653
tristanj wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moonshot already has at least several million exchanges distilled from Claude that they obtained over the past year https://www.anthropic.com/news/detecting-and-preventing-dist... . So they have the infrastructure already set up to do this. Re-running their existing distillation suite on the new Fable endpoint would be trivial. Given that Fable was available for 72 hours back in June, I asked GPT-5.6 Sol to estimate…

As far as I know, 100% of those Fable interactions would have had encrypted reasoning blocks, so distillation would be distinctly nontrivial even if the data were somehow available.

Encrypted reasoning traces don't prevent distillation. You only need the input prompts and final output responses to distill capabilities. As Anthropic explained in their distillation report (linked above), Moonshot AI already collected millions of session traces, covering:

* Agentic reasoning and tool use

* Coding and data analysis

* Computer-use agent development

* Computer vision

Hiding the internal CoT blocks stops you from training on internal reasoning traces, sure, but it does nothing to prevent standard input-output distillation.

Plus, the CoT blocks weren't even removed/hidden completely. They're still visible, just in summarized form. Raw CoT was replaced by summarized CoT, and summarized CoT still has distillation value.

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

#657

Post by m4rtink »

bluegatty wrote: post #515
dijksterhuis wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's only now the issues are coming into the commons in a way that industry / society needs the regulatory clarity. you mean like the regulatory clarity surrounding stealing shit to make the LLMs in the first place? > [There is] extensive litigation on the limits of Fair Use to AI development. Currently, we only have 3 first instance decisions out of the 53 cases being tried. It will likely take a decade before we…

It's hilarious to see how all these HN intellectuals, who on any other day are rabidly against most DRM / IP issues all of a sudden become private property absolutists. It's also sadly hypocritical to see all this rhetoric here on this thread decrying SOTAs for using a variety of content for their inputs as somehow sTeaLINg sTufF! ... ... but Chinese SOTA foundries directly using distillation as fair game. I don't th…

I think people just react to the hypocrisy of corporations stamping on people for "copyright violations" only for (often the same) corporations to blatantly obtain any data they can find, totally disregarding any licenses, scrappers overloading web sites or even privacy.

And the result is force feeding an AI slop generator with a subscription while making personal hardware 3x+ times more expensive.

No wonder people are fed up with this behavior.

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

#659

Post by preisschild »

mycall wrote: post #610
rustcleaner wrote: post #606

Nice! I hope to see continued liberation of these locked up SOTA models. Cloud is a virtual prison, since other people's policies on what they think a user should and should not do cannot be [easily] bypassed, if enforced remotely on a cloud. All digital natives should be skeptical of cloud-hosted services or software. Think like an intelligence agency or sovereign: how are you going to get screwed by the cloud? Your…

Do you think China is doing this for the reasons you mentioned: liberation..efforts, human interests and freedom of policy?

Its obvious they do it for soft power, but at least they actually deliver something useful to the world and not something locked down that only a single company owns.
Post reply on HN