Live data from Hacker News

Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

tobi.knaup.me

231–240 of 346 posts

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government backed monopoly to ensure that supply remains artificially restricted to ensure that the market will support the higher prices is

Without temporary monopolies granted by patents, those prescription medications wouldn’t exist in the first place.

Okay? Does that disagree with anything I wrote?

My point was to whether it was artificial not whether it was bad.

We can have artificial interventions in markets, and that can be a net benefit and a good thing.

I’m not sure why everyone is responding as if “artificial” and “bad” are the same thing

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government backed monopoly to ensure that supply remains artificially restricted to ensure that the market will support the higher prices is

Drug companies have a portfolio of compounds they research. Most don’t pay off, so R&D costs make their way into the pricing of those superstar and other drugs that do work. Also, timelines are pretty long.

Well, R&D costs are able to make their way into the pricing due to the artificial supply restriction.

If supply was not artificially restricted (through patents), then competitors would be able to manufacture the drug, supply would expand, the price would collapse, and the original inventor would not be able to recover their R&D costs.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#233
post #126

Everyone is talking about banning Chinese models but nobody talks how it is feasible to ban them. I think it’s impossible simply because technically there is no such thing as a “Chinese model”. There is no way to tell apart an “American” model from a “Chinese” one by looking at their weights. Weights are just numbers and you can’t assign country of origin to numbers. One can find very easy workarounds to any naive at…

Aren’t the models just software ? You could ban them in say high assurance environments like to be FedRAMP certified you wouldn’t be allowed to use them.

There is no great firewall so banning their import via the Internet is impossible

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#234
post #184
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly imo this is just proof apple will win in the end. Eventually a phone will be able to run a model good enough to do most things and it then is game over. I don't see how these are related. The accuracy and capabilities of your model are directly related to its size. You need a lot of memory for that. It will be decades before we get enough useful memory in a phone form factor at a price point people can aff…

If it wasn’t for the current memory fiasco, Apple would be even closer to providing a solution on the desktop that is affordable for most (Hacker News participants) who want to run a large model locally at reasonable cost, which will happen within the next 3 to 5 years easy with the way software and hardware are progressing, the main-frame future for most people that use computers isn’t coming back so OpenAI and Anth…

> If it wasn’t for the current memory fiasco, Apple would be even closer to providing a solution on the desktop that is affordable for most (Hacker News participants)

Already running models locally without apple hardware, and have an encrypted vpn tunnel from my mobile devices back to my desktop over the internet. The time is now.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's simple, the US government will put any Chinese open model companies on the entity list which blocks any company which does business with the US from also doing business with the Chinese companies. This creates a chilling effect where even if it may be harder to tell, no US company will be able to provide or use any overt Chinese open model and won't even risk trying to go around as the punishments for trying to…

Hosting and providing Chinese models wouldn't be the same as doing business with the sanctioned entities though, you don't interact with them in any capacity if you only use the weights and don't sign any contracts.

They can easily write the law such that your first part becomes illegal too.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#236
post #207
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because you need those calculations to "pump" nuclear weapons. They are needed to calculate both the geometry to make fusion bombs possible at all and to calculate the effect of a given geometry. They are the reason US/Russia/China have the biggest and strongest weapons known to humanity. We have a couple new nuclear weapon designs, but not really going for bigger or stronger. Just packaging. We built the big power…

> We have a couple new nuclear weapon designs, but not really going for bigger or stronger. Just packaging. There's many other considerations. Like the type and amount of fissile material. To name one that became well known: any plutonium needs to be refreshed (re-breeded I believe is the term) every few years. Also, look at first designs: https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-35242069 The weight is secret, but I think y…

> There's many other considerations. Like the type and amount of fissile material. To name one that became well known: any plutonium needs to be refreshed (re-breeded I believe is the term) every few years.

Already mentioned in the comment you replied to:

> > Now, stockpile stewardship -- being sure that stuff will keep working without ongoing testing -- is a bit expensive in compute. You need early 2010s supercomputer power.

> Surely you can see why someone (especially aircraft designers) might ask for better versions. Ideally you'd like a version that fits on the hypersonic missiles and those things ... are just not going to work. The size. The shape. The weight. None of them will work.

The "new" US nuclear weapons are direct derivatives of older designs produced with less computing. B61-13 a direct child and similar footprint to 1967's B61. W87-1 direct descendent of the 80's W87. W93 is closest to a "clean sheet' design but hits similar size targets.

> Then a quick theoretical exploration will tell you that the minimum theoretical size of such a device is tiny. The scare was about "suitcase sized", but if you actually do the calculation looking for the minimum ... to do it however you need to create an explosion of the correct shape to get anywhere near those minimum sizes. And explosion simulations are a problem that utterly sucks ...

The backpack W54 was developed in 1959. Tinier devices were developed in the 60s and 70s but ultimately abandoned for proliferation rather than technical concerns. The total computing power used for this was miniscule.

Nuclear weapons are just not pushing forward supercomputing anymore. They did, for awhile, for stockpile stewardship, but we've become relatively confident that our stockpile will still work.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#237
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “The source described leading AI labs or their allies approaching the administration every 3-5 months with an idea to ban open-source models.” That's going to hit first amendment grounds pretty quick, the same way that software in general did. The modern version of the decss flag will be a character that says "I think good weights are {...weights go here...}" They could, however, ban any payment to a chinese entity…

That's going to hit first amendment grounds pretty quick, the same way that software in general did Don't count on that. "National security" == the cheat code for the US court system that instantly bypasses any First Amendment issues.

That was the literal reason given back then and it did not stick.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#238
post #126

Everyone is talking about banning Chinese models but nobody talks how it is feasible to ban them. I think it’s impossible simply because technically there is no such thing as a “Chinese model”. There is no way to tell apart an “American” model from a “Chinese” one by looking at their weights. Weights are just numbers and you can’t assign country of origin to numbers. One can find very easy workarounds to any naive at…

Regulatory capture? One of the two companies that stands to benefit most has a founder who, together with his wife, donated $25 million to MAGA Inc, a pro-Trump super PAC, and another $25 million to Leading the Future, whose stated mission is to advocate for policies “friendly to the artificial intelligence industry.” Open-weight models aren’t necessarily aligned with the commercial interests of the industry’s largest incumbents.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#239
I respect Knaup's opinion but disagree with the claim he makes here.

Kubernetes took off because everyone could run it on pretty much anything. Bigger hardware meant bigger clusters, but developers could spin up a cluster on their laptops and deploy their apps into it. More importantly, companies could repurpose their decommissioned servers as k8s clusters, a massive unlock seeing how huge companies had heaps of these in their racks.

This isn't possible with open weights models. Not in the same way.

First, you're out of the game if you don't have a data center class GPU (or it's sort of prosumer equivalent). Model servers support CPU inference, but you might as well watch paint dry as you wait for results...and you'll still have to run super quantized low-parameter models that aren't as good.

Realistically, companies will need to purchase millions of dollars of nVIDIA gear (through suppliers) to serve agentic-capable models at scale, an activity that is being made more expensive and complicated by the day as the hyperscaleds slurp up the demand.

It also really is a huge problem that all of the open weights models are coming out of one country that also happens to be a superpower. I don't think this can be handwaved away, and it's concerning to see so many folks here minimize this.

American companies running on Chinese intelligence. As a country that prides itself on being the knowledge capital of the world, the optics manifested by this are horrible, not to mention the absolutely massive supply chain risks (the counterfeit Cisco devices comes to mind, except worse because the rangers are in the weights and might not be possible to distill out).

This is a threat even if you focus solely on the individual developer. Recall how AWS became...AWS. They "fanatically" focused on the developer experience. They designated this as key to their growth strategy, and rightfully so. How people talk about using Qwen or Kimi and the like on here feels like that (ignoring how these models are ALSO from huge for-profits).

The only solution here is for the big labs to make some of their most capable models open-weights. There is a lot of secret sauce around routing, inference, hosting and other stuff that makes them work as well as they do, but the community can figure that out. Of course, this is basically a death sentence to those companies, but that's what they get for playing with monkey paws, I guess.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#240
> ... once an open platform that people can customize becomes the industry’s center of gravity, no single vendor can match the combined rate of innovation around it

That assertion is sublime, and if not true, it should be and can be.

Thanks for the thought (and the optimism hit).

Post reply on HN