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

221–230 of 359 posts

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

#221

Post by selectodude »

gruez wrote: post #201
selectodude wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you realize that LLMs are “just” extremely efficient lossy data compression, it’s hard for me to see how it’s anything other than taking people’s shit, putting it into a gigantic zip file, and letting people search against it.

Wait till you hear about Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. (2007) and Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc. (2015), both of which ruled that lossy and verbatim copies (respectively) are allowed for for-profit use.

Too late. Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc. is a good one too because Internet Archive got the exact opposite outcome in court for doing the exact same thing. I recognize the bullshit, I just call it out to keep myself sane.

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

#222

Post by TedDallas »

Corporations are already pulling back from using expensive SotA closed models. The buffet is open weight. Just look at Databricks as an endpoint provider for both open weight and closed LLMs. Companies will utilize what is cheaper and does the job. We all know the market pressure is real and present. What has become truly apparent is that when (not if) mythos class open weight models get released, if cybersecurity folks and developers have no access to use them to help harden and guard infrastructure, it leaves the gates wide open to attach vectors which will not be defensible. This is the real danger that the vast majority of corporate entities should be caring about. Shutting down open models is setting up for serious security concerns.

The OpenAI/Huggingface debacle is patient-zero. Huggingface used GLM 5.2 to help mitigate and were unable to use more capable closed sota models for the analysis due to guardrails. It is a foot gun of the highest order. We should all be concerned. I feel like Captain Obvious saying this.

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

#223

Post by manoDev »

Ekaros wrote: post #121
manoDev wrote: post #47

It's inevitable. The value proposition of the software isn't large enough to justify (by itself) the valuation. Not to mention it's trained on lots of public or scraped data. It's a gold rush, and the only guy getting rich will be the one selling the shovel (nvidia + cloud in this case).

And I would not be so sure about cloud... It is like building massive brothel and then the rush simply going away and you still having loan to pay.

There's money now to _build_ these massive data centers. If there is long-term money to operate, we'll see.

It might mean we'll get cheaper cloud compute in the future, but I'm also positive on the market's ability to absorb the excess capacity quickly. It's Jervon's paradox.

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

#224

Post by JumpCrisscross »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #187
wolttam wrote: post #5

No way this can go wrong for the U.S. economy! Do everything you can to protect the existing incumbents, pay no mind to the wider consequences. Winning strategy.

Distills are bad for the US economy because they compress margins that otherwise go to pushing the frontier. You'd see model progress dramatically slowed if US companies had to compete on distills.

> You'd see model progress dramatically slowed if US companies had to compete on distills

We’re already competing on distills—they exist. The question is whether America will actually compete or if it will lean into its populist tendency and cede the market globally to China.

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

#225

Post by tsoukase »

baxtr wrote: post #43

How ironic that OpenAI is fighting Open AI.

Naming plays top role in a corp's success. OpenAI chose terrible ones: a cheating, barely legal for the company and a scientific abbreviation for their popular product. I predict market fate will give them a lesson by pushing them to failure.

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

#226

Post by dTal »

bloppe wrote: post #179
palmotea wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place 1. You're mischaracterizing and exaggerating the policies to falsely support your point. Things go into the public domain all the time: https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2026/ . 2. It's not like the model companies had the attitude "oh copyright is too long, we disagree on the term." Their…

They're attitude is more "this is fair use" which, according to all precedent, is probably true in most cases (unless the models actually start regurgitating huge parts of the Copyrighted material without a license). Of course, distillation is also fair use under Copyright law. Copyright was never meant to be a moral framework. It was always a practical framework designed to incentivize publishing that would ultimate…

Was it really "designed to incentivize" anything? Or was it introduced to protect a powerful, influential business model? Looking at how laws are passed now, I know which explanation I find more congruent.

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

#227

Post by bad_haircut72 »

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.

Yeh all I wanna do I hire a few employees, raise some capital and put my AI nudifier out into the hands of German schoolkids, but damn EU regulators just wants to keep the little guy down I guess

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

#229

Post by paulpan »

wolttam wrote: post #5

No way this can go wrong for the U.S. economy! Do everything you can to protect the existing incumbents, pay no mind to the wider consequences. Winning strategy.

It's the exact parallel of how it'll play out for U.S. automakers: destined for irrelevance given their inability or unwillingness to compete against China in the EV market. Instead they pretend EVs are bad and cry for protectionist policies.

The sad fact here is that OpenAI and Anthropic are only looking for a max 1-year runway (Anthropic's is only a few months away) so that they can IPO and their VC investors cash out immensely. They do not care about AI safety or fairness, only to appease their VC overlords. But the public is being lied to and pitched this narrative that "open weight AI models are all bad".

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

#230

Post by [deleted] »

ralusek wrote: post #215
economistbob wrote: post #132

[flagged]

> They want you to rent their compute instead of running it on your own hardware I don't think this is the main thing. I think the real risk open weights AI poses to them is that it allows us to get inference from providers that only care about making profits on inference. What OpenAI/Anthropic want is to be able to jack up inference prices once everyone is dependent. Open weights keeps them honest.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN