101–110 of 337 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is some bizarre victim inversion. The providers of closed models are the ones who are trying to use regulation to stop their open model competition, not the other way around.
This is how it is with all of these guys, their only principle is "what's good for me", and will twist all narratives to fit it
[flagged]
The list of companies that signed this letter is telling (including Nvidia, Meta, Microsoft). Equally telling is the list of companies that did not sign it -- including Google, Amazon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm very confused by this comment, I don't know who you're referring to.
None of the people signed this have ever produced a frontier model at a given date (Which is to say its neither Google/OAI/Ant). The ones that sign are meta, musk (who is in the shovel selling business as well), hugging face obviously and few others Note: Just pointing out the comment intent and nothing else
I wonder what is happening behind closed doors for these companies to be issuing such a joint letter.
So Nvidia benefits from more inference providers running many Chinese models that they otherwise would not have been able to service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>open models are inherently decelerationist, ungovernable, and will slow development on the frontier Ungovernable makes intuitive sense, but I don’t understand how open weight models could be decelerationist or slow the development of the frontier. Was there an argument for those positions?
Open weight models challenge the "winner takes all" hypothesis, which motivates the astronomical valuations and acts as a justification for trains of cash dumped into AI development. In other words, if AI models become a commodity, the "AI leaders" will not be able to burn the cash like they do today, thus resulting in a "slower" (one could say instead "more sustainable") development of AI models.
This is all a moot point because there's no way you can copyright a model because you can just randomly perturb weights and still be fine.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...
I'm finding the list of signatories on this letter really interesting and somewhat confusing, looking purely through the lens of economic interest. It makes sense to see Meta, the startups, and the VC firms on this list. And it makes sense to see OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google all missing. Microsoft is somewhat unexpected to me. I don't think of them as having a focus on open weight models (no more than Google), and t…
Therefore it is no surprise that both companies are among the signatories.
The motivation of Palantir is very transparent, they have launched a product created in cooperation with NVIDIA, which is a turnkey system (Sovereign AI) that includes all hardware (i.e. a rack with servers full of NVIDIA GPUs) and all software needed by a company to run on its premises LLM inference and also training/fine tuning.
Thus the Palantir product competes with OpenAI and Anthropic and it benefits from the existence of open weights LLMs.
The motivation of Microsoft is more obscure for now, but because its criticism was very similar to that of Palantir, about how dangerous it is for corporations to delegate the processing of their AI needs to external entities like OpenAI and Anthropic, I assume that Microsoft is also going to propose an alternative to using remotely the OpenAI and Anthropic APIs.
Unlike Palantir, Microsoft is not likely to suggest self-hosting on premises, but I suppose that they might promote self-hosting on some kind of instances rented from Azure.
I'm finding the list of signatories on this letter really interesting and somewhat confusing, looking purely through the lens of economic interest. It makes sense to see Meta, the startups, and the VC firms on this list. And it makes sense to see OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google all missing. Microsoft is somewhat unexpected to me. I don't think of them as having a focus on open weight models (no more than Google), and t…
MS is playing literally all the sides in this whole AI thing. They are a massive investor in oAI, and have lots of rights to use their models for a long time. They also have the cloud where they offer inference w/ all the benefits of already being there, data retention, etc. They also have a research wing that can build models (rumours are they're aiming for frontier-ish). I don't think there's currently an angle in this AI thing that MS hasn't aimed for.