Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 983 posts

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#931

Post by mcv »

wasfgwp wrote: post #909
one33seven wrote: post #798

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adam Smith himself knew you had to constrain the market in ordner to protect capitalism from capitalists. His work didn't end with his first book.

Yes, it’s freedom both from state interference but also from monopolies, oligopolies and trusts using their position to suppress the competitiveness of other market participants. Which is generally impossible to prevent without the state interfering in the markets.

Which is why a free market requires regulation, but only for the purpose to break up trusts, cartels and monopolies, and to ensure equal access to the market and a level playing field.

It's not a trivial problem to solve and probably requires constant readjustment, and there's probably plenty of room for ambiguity in assessing which decision would make the market more free or whether something is or isn't hurting market freedom. But some regulation is undeniably necessary.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#932

Post by slashdave »

stale2002 wrote: post #669
slashdave wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is stealing the R&D of another company.

Ok, but only if you also conceed that all of these AI companies were stealing to train their models in the first place. Either everyone was stealing all along, and they should all be sued out of existence, or nobody is stealing. Personally, I think its all fair use and support all of the training, including distilations.

Distillation is forbidden by the provider of the model.

I suppose you think that model providers are not allowed to impose restrictions on the use of their model? Think carefully before answering.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#933

Post by slashdave »

potsandpans wrote: post #691
slashdave wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, you mean not commit fraud? Why would any respectable company do that?

Except this is not fraud. And just because a company _really_ wants to make a trillion dollar valuation doesn't mean they get to invent a new type of fraud.

Yes, breaking the terms of use is fraud. And, no, no self-respecting company would do this deliberately.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#934

Post by slashdave »

dannyw wrote: post #867
slashdave wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, you mean not commit fraud? Why would any respectable company do that?

Didn't Anthropic say they banned OpenAI for doing it on their models?

Well, depends if you want to call OpenAI "respectable"

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#935

Post by LtWorf »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #839
rapidaneurism wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great points, but I think that banning open source databases would have been better not for employees, but for shareholders.

Aren't employees of US tech companies typically also shareholders, by virtue of part of their compensation being paid in company stock?

Not really, they cannot vote so their shares are completely meaningless and can become worthless very easily.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#936

Post by LtWorf »

wasfgwp wrote: post #906
pbgcp2026 wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"you, me, and so many people in the United States still have a far better quality of life and level of freedom" LOL - are you sure about this?

That’s extremely American centered, though? Despite the constant complaining the median American is still very well off compared to almost everyone else. If you go to the top 10 percentile or so them maybe only Switzerland and some very small countries (tax havens, petro states and such) can really compete.

We're comparing average, not the 0.001%

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#937

Post by JumpCrisscross »

expedition32 wrote: post #929
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's former sovereignty is very questionable and not clear cut Same as Taliban-run Afghanistan, same as Iraq, same as Ukraine, same as Taiwan. If you’re Tibetan, the line is academic—you faced, by modern definitions, genocide all the same. Calling the territory you’re invading and/or annexing illegitimately independent, illegitimately governed is how these always go.

The US was literally founded on genocide. Glass houses.

> US was literally founded on genocide. Glass houses

Most nations have been. The American one was particularly bad, being both recent and extensive. But I’d venture that a strong minority of us descend from lineages who never committed genocide. It’s a unique trait to humans (and chimpanzees, apparently).

If any history of genocide invalidates an accuser, genocide becomes a consequence-free crime. The general defence becomes pointing out the accuser’s history.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#938

Post by andrekandre »

yunnpp wrote: post #733
andrekandre wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well free markets meant something very different in adam smith's time; what they meant by free was 'free from rents' whereas today its usually mean in the milton freedman terms as 'free from any interference' which is how i interpret the parent poster... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market#Classical_Economic...

It's not free from interference either. It requires enforcing antitrust, for example, which the US seems to have forgotten. Literally what you quoted: > the term free market refers to a market free from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities.

yep, to keep them "free" you have to "interefere" with them

as an aide, the overloading of the term free is really annoying because it muddles things so much...

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#939

Post by chii »

handle584 wrote: post #903
chii wrote: post #782

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is that objectively true? objectively true. And there's zero need to factor in things like "human rights" or "environmental protection", because these are costs that have been externalized and the consumer don't pay for it (in their lifetime anyway). That's what objectively means. Chinese cars are unavailable in the US because US manufacturers are 100% unable to compete. Japan was in the exact same position before,…

> because US manufacturers are 100% unable to compete. In the June just passed Tesla Model Y is the best selling EV in China.

And where is that model Y manufactured? Surely you're not suggesting that it's imported from the US.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#940

Post by cobbzilla »

TurdF3rguson wrote: post #930
cobbzilla wrote: post #913

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The AI rigs cost money, sure. But no one is talking about regulating those. We are talking about regulating models, which do have zero cost of reproduction. It’s like banning the leaked DeCSS key. Good luck.

Well, no. We're mostly talking about banning access to models running on someone else's infra. I don't think many people in this thread have the resources to run a frontier model in their living room.

How do you do that without banning the model itself.

It doesn't matter who can or can't run it.

They are trying to ban something that can be represented entirely by a sequence of bytes. An illegal number, like the DeCSS key.

The fact that money is involved does not change the free speech aspects. This isn't CSAM or torture porn. It's data.

Post reply on HN