Live data from Hacker News

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

axios.com

241–250 of 359 posts

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

#241
post #90

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 really believe OpenAI, Anthropic, or any corporation for that matter has done something truly altruistic then I have a bridge to sell you.

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

#242
Am I the only one that finds the "laissez faire" attitude of the tech crowd insufferable?

There is this chronic refusal to believe that new technologies can cause harm.

My team works on testing risks from both companies' leading models and I feel pretty confident saying that uncensored next gen models becoming "open" would be a net negative for society.

I don't understand why no narrative regarding the risks of technology can land with the tech crowd until it's too late (hello, social media!)

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

#244
post #90

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…

there's persuasion, and then there's inspiring people already on your side. the upvotes/downvotes will give you a clue who the audience turns out to be. it was an upvote from me.

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

#245

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…

I fully agree; but we also MUST STOP PRETENDING like HN and YC are good faith actors here. They are not. They blatantly curate (by flagging) comments and do everything possible to help both companies do this. Its not just OpenAI/Anthropic, there is a toxic ecosystem here supporting itself and doing everything possible to subvert the will of the people. There is 0 interest in merit and absolute focus on regulatory cap…

It's not HN. It's the readers.

There are lots of Anthropic and OpenAI employees here.

There are also lots of people that totally hate AI here.

If they don't like your comment, some of them will flag you. I get caught up in this frequently. The flagging strongly correlates with the audience that the headline sentiment attracts.

In a thread like this that is laser-focused on real criticism of OpenAI and Anthropic you'll do just fine to call out their bad behavior.

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

#246
post #236

To 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 developme…

[deleted]

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

#247
post #122
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No large company has ever cared about anything other than the financials, this is not specific to AI.

This is actually not the case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co . However a look at Henry Ford’s personal priorities shows that there’s a be-careful-what-you-wish-for aspect to this (also arguably visible to a lesser extent in eg. Mark Zuckerberg’s dual-class-structure-enabled control on Facebook—and in Musk’s de facto control over his rambling empire).

I feel like this just furthers my point. Over 100 years ago a court ruled that companies have to operate primarily for the benefit of their shareholders. That is the regime we have been operating in ever since. You may get some eccentric cases like Ford or Zuckerberg from time to time when they don't operate in the interests of shareholders, but it's far from the norm.

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

#248
post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We will take it, we won't pay for it, and we will use it to replace you and make ourselves rich The whole point of fair use (which courts have so far ruled AI training is) is that you don't have to ask for permission or pay them for it.

> The whole point of fair use (which courts have so far ruled AI training is) is that you don't have to ask for permission or pay them for it. Is that settled law? I doubt it. And IMHO, AI training violates the spirit of fair use. It's not really a method of criticism or commentary. It's a system to use people's own work to undermine their ability to economically subsist on that work. Though how about this for a prop…

>Is that settled law? I doubt it.

That just seems like a cope unless you have actual evidence that the lower/appellate courts have misruled. And no, "I don't like the ruling because [all the reasons AI is bad]" doesn't count, you need actual legal justifications, preferably from legal experts. Not to mention that even if the supreme court ruled on it, it's not really "settled", eg. Roe. v. Wade and Humphrey's Executor v. United States being overturned

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

#249
post #66

I’m in a bubble so I may not see the big picture, but I feel like these guys are completely destroying any kind of credibility they had. Anthropic especially has this arrogant, “we’re smarter than you”, communication style, and acts like they’re serving some higher purpose (to the point of absurdity in some cases like “model welfare”) - I think part of all this might be the EA roots but I’m not sure. But then they ge…

They are relying on the same tactics Apple and Tesla used - loyal, fanatical fanbase drowning every legitimate criticism. Their fanatical fanbase is doing the real heavy lifting, not some joint-statement: "I haven't written any code in a year man, this is so good", "you are just a denier that will be irrelevant in 2 months", "you are not knowledgeable on the subject of ai", "you are just a hater" list goes on, I've h…

Interestingly, Apple will Sherlock the pants off of OpenAI and Anthropic once they release Siri+. At least for B2C.

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

#250
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.

Why should some unelected US-based technocrats with a terrible track record get to decide for us?
Post reply on HN