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

Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 628 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#141

Post by jmalicki »

waffletower wrote: post #101
kylecazar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

While Zuck's contributions are probably overwhelmingly more negative than positive, Meta initiated both pytorch and llama which have had profoundly positive effects on AI research. And I really am not a fan of python :D

pytorch is really mostly C++ after all, you don't have to use it with python.

Python just allows you to use it like "normal code", whereas if you program it in C++ you really get exposed to what's under the hood and can't write "normal code"

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#142

Post by tverbeure »

baron816 wrote: post #122
kylecazar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

[flagged]

> But I think the legacy media deserves 100x that criticism for doing the same thing.

No, they don’t do the same thing.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#143

Post by windexh8er »

GetMeSoon wrote: post #80
lukan wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This is enough to absolve them of almost any sin. If I were a utilitarian, I'd unironically be a Zuckerberg fan right now." Well, if it were the only thing he is doing now, but FB is still controlling peoples social life with who knows what kind of intentions they train their algorithms for. But I can and do still welcome this move here.

> FB is still controlling peoples social life with who knows what kind of intentions they train their algorithms for. As opposed to literally any social network out there, right?

I'm curious how well influence campaigns work on platforms like Mastodon, or even BlueSky. They are, likely, not sourced from the platform providers which is definitely not the case for FB.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#144

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

baron816 wrote: post #122
kylecazar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

[flagged]

I always hope that people who write things like this are considerably younger than I, because as someone who experienced "legacy media" for decades before the Internet was widely available, the idea that "they’re not doing anything more evil than what was already the norm" is complete, total, 100% bullshit.

Yes, "clickbait" was a thing even before people were clicking. "Yellow journalism" helped start the Spanish-American war over 125 years ago. But the pernicious effects on society of social media are way, way worse, if only because social media companies have way more data, and correspondingly more levers to act on that data. They run addiction machines that legacy media could only dream of, and they do it for the sole purpose of making money, all other consequences be damned.

I'm into a rather niche artistic pursuit, and I get lots of reels on this topic, and I noticed that the top comment on these reels is always the dumbest, most asinine comment imaginable. It's like if HN's algorithm were literally reversed. It's like this because of course these comments get lots of "engagement" because it's just rage bait. And all of Facebook is like this - they deliberately push the most rage inducing content because it's profitable.

Zuckerberg deserves all the opprobrium he gets and then some. I'm not necessarily arguing that legacy media is more "moral", but they simply never had the tech to tear society apart like Zuckerberg does.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#145

Post by Krasnol »

baron816 wrote: post #122
kylecazar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

[flagged]

> But I think the legacy media deserves 100x that criticism for doing the same thing.

This comparison is absurd.

"Legacy media" wouldn't even be technically able to cause so much damage because they send one message to everybody while meta aims their messages and members at specific other members of their platform.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulat...

https://www.npr.org/2026/03/25/nx-s1-5746125/meta-youtube-so...

So yeah, Zuck's reputation might be even too good these days but I may see it wrong. It may be that the moral levels in the US are so deep right now that he looks better to me from the outside.

...compared to Elon for example.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#146

Post by ant6n »

dev_l1x_be wrote: post #136
ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments here are surprising to me. I get folks don’t like Zuckerberg and his company and don’t trust his intentions… I don’t either. But this is an unquestionably good thing right?. The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right? More competition the better generally speaking I think. Unless I’m missing something and am getting this who…

Evil people can do things that look good on the surface. He probably has no skin in this game just collecting free karma points.

As they say, even Hitler built the autobahn.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#147

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

creaturemachine wrote: post #138
baron816 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Have you read Sarah Wynn-Williams' book? The whole org is rotten.

Sarah Wynn-Williams book contains a number of implausible anecdotes which people repeat as gospel truth even though they have not AFAIK been corroborated. I am pretty skeptical, for example, that Sheryl Sandberg punished Ms. Wynn-Williams for not getting in bed with her.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#148

Post by 293725903 »

gaigalas wrote: post #21
root-parent wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind.

Psalm 135:15-18 is my favorite version of it, the most clear-headed. It reads more as a warning "if you do this, then this will happen" than an unreasonable commandment. The idols of the nations are silver and gold, made by human hands. They have mouths, but cannot speak, eyes, but cannot see. They have ears, but cannot hear, nor is there breath in their mouths. Those who make them will be like them, and so will all…

Your bible is truly full of wise words to live by. Not at all the insane ramblings of hallucinating conmen:

1 Kings 18:36-40

36 At the time of sacrifice, the prophet Elijah stepped forward and prayed: “Lord, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, let it be known today that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant and have done all these things at your command. 37 Answer me, Lord, answer me, so these people will know that you, Lord, are God, and that you are turning their hearts back again.”

38 Then the fire of the Lord fell and burned up the sacrifice, the wood, the stones and the soil, and also licked up the water in the trench.

39 When all the people saw this, they fell prostrate and cried, “The Lord—he is God! The Lord—he is God!”

40 Then Elijah commanded them, “Seize the prophets of Baal. Don’t let anyone get away!” They seized them, and Elijah had them brought down to the Kishon Valley and slaughtered there.

1 Samuel 18:25-27

25 Saul replied, “Say to David, ‘The king wants no other price for the bride than a hundred Philistine foreskins, to take revenge on his enemies.’” Saul’s plan was to have David fall by the hands of the Philistines.

26 When the attendants told David these things, he was pleased to become the king’s son-in-law. So before the allotted time elapsed, 27 David took his men with him and went out and killed two hundred Philistines and brought back their foreskins. They counted out the full number to the king so that David might become the king’s son-in-law. Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal in marriage.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#149

Post by ElProlactin »

ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments here are surprising to me. I get folks don’t like Zuckerberg and his company and don’t trust his intentions… I don’t either. But this is an unquestionably good thing right?. The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right? More competition the better generally speaking I think. Unless I’m missing something and am getting this who…

If you don't trust his intentions, how can you trust anything he does?

Just take the opening of this post:

> We are fortunate to live at an incredible moment in history. In the next few years, people will be able to use superintelligence beyond human capacity to create and discover extraordinary new things, build new businesses, express new ideas, learn new concepts, and advance our health and quality of life.

> The defining questions of our age are who will have access to superintelligence and what will we direct it towards. Will it be centralized and restricted to a few institutions, or will it be a tool that empowers everyone?

> We propose a philosophy based on individual empowerment as the source of prosperity, invention as the primary purpose of superintelligence, and balance of power as the foundation of safety.

I mean, this is a company that is facing a flood of lawsuits related to child safety and platform addiction. It has already lost a number of lawsuits and been ordered to pay hundreds of millions of dollars, which is potentially just the tip of a massive iceberg that some legal observers have suggested could be similar in nature to the lawsuits against the tobacco industry.

There is an abundance of evidence that Zuckerberg and Meta knew of the dangers its platform exposed young people to and failed to respond adequately to them, and that it even designed features to be more addictive.

So why is that when such a company proclaims it's doing something in the name of "individual empowerment", alarms aren't going off in your head?

Post reply on HN