161–170 of 337 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that different from how companies are reliant on cloud computing?
Yes. No law prevents you from provisioning and using your own hardware.
Some irony: I subscribe to Claude and Codex (20x plans), and now Kimi. Why Kimi? because K3 is the only frontier model I can have a serious conversation with about my product's security. (I did apply for OpenAi's Cyber Pilot but got no response)
The product strategy of 'consumer-grade' AI making deliberately insecure software, and then selling you limited access to the model that can fix it (if they think you deserve to pay them) is just diabolical. (Grade 3 AI which can hack both previous tiers is exclusively sold to the highest bidder.)
It's also not a very good marketing strategy, secure software and quality also goes in pair and it just makes me doubt about the output of Fable/Sol
It makes a ton of sense to see this sort of joint effort being made by these enormous companies, but man, there's some part of me that can't help but feel grossed out knowing the best way to get the US to make the right choice is to have a handful of elite business people say it'd be bad for them.
Yeah, this letter is just proof of (the by now long standing fact) of corporate power/corporate capture of American governance. Tons of popular protests against big AI? Makes no difference. Joint corporate letter about big AI? Possibly the government will do something.
Some irony: I subscribe to Claude and Codex (20x plans), and now Kimi. Why Kimi? because K3 is the only frontier model I can have a serious conversation with about my product's security. (I did apply for OpenAi's Cyber Pilot but got no response)
The product strategy of 'consumer-grade' AI making deliberately insecure software, and then selling you limited access to the model that can fix it (if they think you deserve to pay them) is just diabolical. (Grade 3 AI which can hack both previous tiers is exclusively sold to the highest bidder.)
> The unbearable cheapness of open weight models So the closed model try to get client with their model by saying it's cheaper than employees, and then turn around to lawyer-out cheaper alternative? Truly the american dream.
And the verdict is still out on if it's going to be cheaper than employees in the long run. Maybe for companies in HCoL areas (SV/NYC), but any smaller mid-market org in a LCoL area, frontier model token spend may not end up all that cheaper when your employee salaries are $55k-$75k/year so you're mostly evaluating it as an additional force multiplier expense rather than a headcount replacer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If by "pulled out of the Chinese market" you mean "were hacked by the Chinese government in a way that compromised their intellectual property and the safety of dissidents", then yes [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora
The point is did the US reaction work or was it completely counter productive? Then will attempting to cutoff China again today work or do we expect that also will prove to achieve the exact opposite of what its proponents are claiming?
The Chinese government didn't like that idea. They attacked American companies, stole the IP, and created their own analogs of American corporate offerings. If you are a company and are targeted by a totalitarian government, it's not unreasonable to pull out of that totalitarian government's jurisdiction.
Honestly, the American response to that was not nearly stout enough. Chinese goods and services had been sold in the US without issue for decades at that point, often to the detriment of both domestic and other international market players. When China was expected to play by those rules and allow American companies to do business in a mostly-unfettered way, they attacked the companies and drove them out of their market.
Would be nice to see standardized open weight classes: 12B, 24B, 48B… Who can make the best open model in each weight class.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those salaries seem low for mid sized cities even no?
Nope, not low at all. In the Midwest that’s exceedingly normal, even for non-entry level. $70k a year is living good in the Midwest, especially if dual income household ($140k a year is plenty when a decent house goes for $300k).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regardless of the motivations behind the paper, the fact is that they are right. It's a topsy-turvy world where America closes up and China opens, and I hope it gets corrected soon. And besides, it seems to me like the ethical choice. Given how these models are, in some very real sense, mechanical plagiators, built on the generosity of creators past and present, some of them now in danger of being replaced by the mac…
well let's be clear, there's nothing open about an open-weight model. To me, "open these models up. " must mean provide all the data and supporting documentation required to reproduce the model. That would be "open". Postgres is open because you can download all the data and supporting documentation and reproduce the binary yourself. However, being able to only download a postgres binary would make it no longer open.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here here! Open weights is the term because it's close to open source but everyone thinks everyone else is an idiot and saying the model is downloadable but you can't recreate it is too difficult for our feeble minds to understand. There are actually open source models out there though, with datasets and training code.
I think it has more to do with the fact that there has to be some term to describe the concept of "model which has weights that are openly accessible" Like, that's just a logical thing to call it. I don't believe anyone is making a judgement on the intelligence of the reader to call it "open weight" when it refers to weights that are openly available. "Open source" would be a more appropriate term to describe a model…