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

OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 359 posts

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#191

Post by Avicebron »

brookst wrote: post #90
stego-tech wrote: post #34

And to think I got warned in another post that I need to be nicer/more professional in discussing this topic. Yeah. Nah. Bringing out the same drum I’ve been banging for years now , these companies have never actually cared about ensuring safe AI, regulation, or ensuring it benefits all humanity. It has always, always , been about control and their profit margins. Their actions have never reflected any sort of positi…

The thing about screaming and waving your arms is it makes it hard for people to connect with the argument. A quick scan shows a lack of rigor that usually points towards zealotry rather than a reasoned position: you imply that models are only trained on copyrighted work, you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place, you don’t distinguish between…

If you would like to discuss the nuances you're welcome to elaborate. If the end result of this nuanced is they get to stay kings of the crab bucket and reap greater and greater rewards it's reasoning at both ends to get the middle you want.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#192

Post by krs_ »

brookst wrote: post #90
stego-tech wrote: post #34

And to think I got warned in another post that I need to be nicer/more professional in discussing this topic. Yeah. Nah. Bringing out the same drum I’ve been banging for years now , these companies have never actually cared about ensuring safe AI, regulation, or ensuring it benefits all humanity. It has always, always , been about control and their profit margins. Their actions have never reflected any sort of positi…

The thing about screaming and waving your arms is it makes it hard for people to connect with the argument. A quick scan shows a lack of rigor that usually points towards zealotry rather than a reasoned position: you imply that models are only trained on copyrighted work, you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place, you don’t distinguish between…

> you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place, you don’t distinguish between training on an 80 year old copyrighted work whose author is dead and rights are just in a company portfolio

You're describing what Pirate Party proponents have been championing since the start. Not that I disagree with that notion. Copyright law needs to be changed for modern times. But the laws as currently exist are what they are.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#193

Post by commoner »

Levitz wrote: post #131
stego-tech wrote: post #34

And to think I got warned in another post that I need to be nicer/more professional in discussing this topic. Yeah. Nah. Bringing out the same drum I’ve been banging for years now , these companies have never actually cared about ensuring safe AI, regulation, or ensuring it benefits all humanity. It has always, always , been about control and their profit margins. Their actions have never reflected any sort of positi…

Yes they only care about money. That's what corporations usually do. And I'll take that 10 times out of 10 over China's role in all of this, which is specifically to disrupt and sabotage the rest. I can trust Anthropic and OpenAI to have economic interests. I can't trust the same from Chinese companies, which I can actually trust to have geopolitic interests.

I have no reason to care about the interests of these companies. My interests are best served with a competitive selection of open weights models available for my use.

OpenAI has the year-old GPT-OSS, and Anthropic has never released any open weights models. Meanwhile, other companies are delivering a steady stream of high-quality open weights models every month, and I'm not going to stop using them just because some other people don't like the country they were developed in.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#194

Post by solenoid0937 »

maxloh wrote: post #125

It is ridiculous that OpenAI is a non-profit and Anthropic is a PBC, yet both actively resist open access to AI. This hinders human progress rather than serving it.

"Openness" is not inherently a good thing, this is a naive techno libertarian mindset.

You don't hand every random script kiddie a zero day button. When models get better, you don't hand them an AGI that can help them make bioweapons or whatever.

When it comes to intelligence, there is a limit to openness that any sane non-tech-libertarian would agree on.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#195

Post by positron26 »

Bill Gureley's talk on regulation comes to mind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9cO3-MLHOM&t=1447s

The reason barking at open source will only get the dog thrown into the river is because there is a whole lot more cumulative power distributed among companies and consumers who don't want two incumbents to dictate which kinds of alternatives can exist.

Note that those rushing to the "all corpos evil" talking points will turn around and advocate delegating these decisions to "the government." This is the same government that they also claim is bought by the corporations. It's also the same government that will enforce the regulatory capture on behalf of the yucky corporation against the broad, diverse interests.

Thinking big vs small while embracing the biggest of the big is some kind of inconsistency that people need to deal with by looking in the mirror and finding some awareness. Nuance. If your problem model is wrong, so is every solution you propose except if your wrong model may get lucky from time to time. Not every broken model is a broken clock. Some broken models cannot admit the right answer ever.

The real dynamic on display here is broad, correlated mass of overlapping interests, big and small. The big pile of people and entities that don't want to be governed by OpenAI and Anthropic can push harder and win the tug of war. You don't have to like your temporary allies all the time, but at least know who they are and when you are aligned.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#196

Post by nolok »

nradov wrote: post #60
embedding-shape wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of regulation in Europe is usually to protect people. Regulation in the US seems to be done with the purpose of protection companies. I'm not 100% sure, but this feels non-ideal for most people.

Please explain how making it difficult to start a business and hire employees protects people. I've never understood that logic but maybe I'm missing something.

It's very simple to start a business, and it's even simpler to hire people.

It is hard to fire employee, especially when the company is doing good, yes.

It is a bit slow and administratively annoying to start a business in some countries, yes, though in those you can usually start operating while starting AND there are workarounds which is why there isn't enough pressure to stop it (eg, the german "pre made company shell" market is how you actually do it instead of making your own).

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#197

Post by usef- »

revolvingthrow wrote: post #129
usef- wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What should they do instead? As far as I can tell from their actions they (Anth) are true believers about safety

So far the first and only sophisticated cyberattack was carried out by openai rather than by one the subversive commie models that hate us for our freedoms, so forgive me for taking their safety and alignment spiel somewhat less seriously than they’d like.

That cyberattack is a sign of lack of safety, not of safety. It happened by accident.

"A model being tested broke out of its sandboxing and hacked a production system of a different organisation using a previously-unknown vulnerability, in order to steal test results, and that proves anthropic were worried for no reason months ago about future models being security issues" ...?

Anthropic have released a lot of security patches in recent months, so many that many open source maintainers are facing burnout (google it). It's public knowledge that they weren't lying, you can look at the code. Their ridiculous guardrails were so that projects could patch and prepare for more models like this one coming out.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#198

Post by ryandrake »

1over137 wrote: post #28
echelon wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather we not lose the AI race so idiotically. Winning the AI race means letting OpenAI and Anthropic face market forces. Edit: Clearly other companies are doing well. ElevenLabs, Runway, FAL, RunPod, CoreWeave, Lambda, BaseTen, Lovable. These are real companies that didn't raise absurd amounts of capital. They've grown revenues at a solid clip, provide real value, and didn't go off the deep end with fundrais…

Who is 'we'?

This is a great question. Unless OP works for one of the big AI companies, the "we" is actually just "they." He would rather they not lose the AI race so idiotically. If we are not in the race, we're losers-by-default as those in the race reap all the benefits.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#199

Post by nradov »

paxys wrote: post #166
nradov wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please explain how making it difficult to start a business and hire employees protects people. I've never understood that logic but maybe I'm missing something.

Go live a few months as an average middle class person in Western Europe and then do the same in the US. You can argue in favor of US superiority based on GDP and stock market and number of billionaires a hundred other similar metrics, but looking at basic happiness and quality of life there’s really no comparison. Europeans value maximizing family, community, physical and mental health, leisure time, hobbies, cultur…

Nah. I've spent enough time in Western Europe to know that's total BS. It's a nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there.
Post reply on HN