[flagged]
Wow, talk about a comment that starts out solid, with good points, and making a lot of sense, and ends up in an insane asylum!
[deleted]
OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
231–240 of 359 posts
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#232And 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…
Anyone who thinks these companies ever cared about any of that is naive.
Maybe they cared, but that's always been irrelevant. "Show me the incentive and i'll show you the outcome": the only incentive for a company in our economic system is to make as much money as possible, anything in the way of that will get eroded by incentives (principled people get fired, or quit, or their principles weaken, or they get forced into doing things against their principles, or they get outcompeted, or...).
Thinking that an actor in a system will go against the incentives of the system (at least at scale and over time) is naive.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
>Internet Archive got the exact opposite outcome in court for doing the exact same thing
No, it's not the same thing. Contrary to what many people think, "fair use" isn't something you can invoke to do whatever copyright infringement you want. The judge is supposed to consider several factors, one of which is whether the work was "transformative". In google's case it was offering search results. Internet archive was operating a "digital library" (aka. a filesharing site). Whatever you hate about AI companies sucking up electricity and displacing jobs, they're certainly more transformative (and arguably more transformative than even google search) than whatever the internet archive was doing.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#234This feels like the US is going to take a page from Europes book and regulate itself into uncompetitiveness
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.
[deleted]
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#235And 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…
[deleted]
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#236To their mutual detriment. If anything, this proves how unsustainable of a business LLMs are in their current form.
This is a ultra speed run of what Red Hat and SuSE upending Windows in the 90s/00s.
LLMs are incredible and extremely useful, but they never should have been a for-profit venture. At least not at first. They should have originated from universities (who would have had the capital to fund model development and do so ethically in this universe), and LLMs should have been much, much smaller in scope (like autocorrect in word processors or autocomplete in IDEs). Instead, we (well, OpenAI mostly) opted to burn the Amazon to extract profit from the wood, our planet's future be damned.
Between this, transferring billions from EV R&D, eliminating the EV tax credit and targetting research universities, I can't help but think that Krebs was right. So MANY of the policy decisions being made by the US are inexplicable UNLESS you assume that a rootkit has infected the government.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
> model welfare I shouldn't get in arguments about this stuff online, but have you actually sat down and thought about this in-depth? It's pretty normal to have a gut reaction that this is insane, but it's worth thinking about. If we replaced every neuron in your brain, one by one, with a silicon equivalent, would you stop being conscious? At what point? Would you be able to tell? If yes, what about if we took those…
> If we replaced every neuron in your brain, one by one, with a silicon equivalent, would you stop being conscious? At what point? Would you be able to tell? The idea that we could have a silicon equivalent at all is already a huge assumption. For starters, the silicon equivalent cannot grow or kill neural connections or neurons as needed. Biological systems have a number of properties that silicon systems just don't…
But everything that's different seems like an arbitrary requirement. I hope I'm also conscious in moments where I'm not actively growing/killing neural connections.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I am less exuberant on market willing to pay the rates that are need to cover the loan servicing costs of these investments. Numbers look really suspicious because they are so significant compared to economy in general.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#239Earlier 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…
[deleted]
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
No large company has ever cared about anything other than the financials, this is not specific to AI.
No, you don't get to play the "everybody does that" card. These companies started out claiming to care about openness, and to have moral high ground.
Because it used to be profitable for them to say that when the only people paying attention were a niche technical audience. Now, it's no longer profitable to do so. That's what it's always been about.