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

281–290 of 359 posts

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

#281

Post by JumpCrisscross »

brazukadev wrote: post #279
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bad for the US economy Almost certainly not in the long term. If AI is a productivity enhancer, which I think we have evidence for, then the American economy’s heft (and continuing dynamism) get a tailwind. The minority of the new, leveraged economy getting hit will be a short-term painful adjustment, but it need not be anything more.

The longer the US AI strategy continues to be to bet on openai/anthropic the bigger it will be the US economy impact. The US bounced back from the dotcom crash and the 2008 crash, it does not mean it will bounce back after an AI crash.

> it does not mean it will bounce back after an AI crash

It almost certainly will. AI dominates growth. It doesn’t dominate the actual economy. Most spending and investment is entirely decoupled from it.

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

#282

Post by commoner »

maxloh wrote: post #124
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…

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.

OpenAI is currently a PBC that metastasized out of the original nonprofit also called OpenAI which owns 26% of that PBC. But yes, it is ridiculous.

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

#283

Post by dd8601fn »

axegon_ wrote: post #145
andy99 wrote: 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…

I see little evidence of business-oriented cult followings, here.

Certainly people have preferred tools. And if people argued with you about the merits of llms, that’s obviously a different thing.

I suspect if a third provider blew the two out of the water tomorrow with an amazing model, people would want to try it right away. Assuming the company wasn’t grinding up kittens to produce it, or something equally noxious.

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

#284

Post by palmotea »

gruez wrote: post #248
palmotea wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Executo…

> That just seems like a cope unless you have actual evidence that the lower/appellate courts have misruled.

No, it means lower court judges get overruled all the time and it's not like the courts and law always functions as some dispassionate applicators of some fixed framework. It's not settled until the process gets worked much farther than it probably has.

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

#285

Post by wolttam »

brazukadev wrote: post #279
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bad for the US economy Almost certainly not in the long term. If AI is a productivity enhancer, which I think we have evidence for, then the American economy’s heft (and continuing dynamism) get a tailwind. The minority of the new, leveraged economy getting hit will be a short-term painful adjustment, but it need not be anything more.

The longer the US AI strategy continues to be to bet on openai/anthropic the bigger it will be the US economy impact. The US bounced back from the dotcom crash and the 2008 crash, it does not mean it will bounce back after an AI crash.

Well, one thing it will still have is a boat-load of compute.

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

#286

Post by embedding-shape »

WarmWash wrote: post #259
aeve890 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean ~35% ?

I mean if you cut out the bottom 65% and the top 1% (but perhaps even top 5%) of americans, you are left with a group of generally affluent people who are the actual backbone of the US economy. These people work white collar career jobs, own houses, own stocks, have retirement on track, college debt paid off or soon to be, good health insurance, go on vacations, drive new(ish) cars, let their instagram impulse buying…

> If you isolate this group and compare them globally, it spells out why for decades so many white collar workers wanted to be in the US rather than Europe or the East.

Given it sounds like you've already done this, care to share the results you got? When I meet peers from the US, it still seems like things are more rough there, regardless of class, compared to in other countries, but this is of course based on my personal experience, would love to see concrete data about it.

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

#287

Post by [deleted] »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #219
jacobgold wrote: post #44

Humanity discovered a technique for compressing the world's information into a few files that fit on a USB drive. It's just insane that some people thought they'd get to be the only ones who get to possess them.

This is such a naive take. What happens when "those files on a USB drive" turn into a zero day button that can harm millions of people? What happens when they help authoritarian dictatorships build nuclear weapons? What happens when they teach average people the steps needed to make a bioweapon at home? Every society restricts dangerous capabilities at the end of the day, because most people realize there is a crosso…

[deleted]

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

#288

Post by dd8601fn »

commoner wrote: post #278
dd8601fn wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t say this enough… Expect the tap on open models to slow and eventually disappear. They don’t exist for altruistic reasons. It’s peculiar to current conditions.

Unlike Claude Fable, once an open weights model is released, it's available forever (or at least until every copy is lost or deleted, which won't be soon). Open weights models are already great, and the ones that are already released will continue to be just as good as they are today even if newer versions are released at a different speed in the future.

A year from now we won’t care that today’s qwen is good enough for some stuff. But yes, it’ll still be available.

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

#289

Post by morbicer »

StevenWaterman wrote: post #98
andy99 wrote: 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…

> 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…

Then they should stop the development and focus on the identifying of consciousness. But wait, there's money to be made now so screw that and just talk big words to press.

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

#290

Post by AlexeyBrin »

metadat wrote: post #262
Lutzb wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ARTHUR I'm sorry -- did you just say you need my brain? BENJY MOUSE Yes. To extract the question. ARTHUR You can't have my brain. I'm using it. FRANKY MOUSE Barely. BENJY MOUSE We can replace it if you think it's important. An electronic brain maybe. FRANKY MOUSE A simple one should suffice. Who would know the difference? ARTHUR I would! FRANKY MOUSE No, you wouldn't. We could program you not to.

Source? This is gold.

Probably Douglas Adams The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy the book or the screenplay for the movie with the same name.
Post reply on HN