Earlier quoted context omitted.
GitHub Copilot and Microsoft Copilot are different products
Same difference. They both are glorified liberians.
Liberians seem quite useful, then! I’ve never been to Africa myself.
GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
151–160 of 742 posts
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#152If you want to destroy open source completely, the more models the better. Microsoft's co-opting and infiltration of OSS projects will serve as a textbook example of eliminating competition in MBA programs. And people still support it by uploading to GitHub.
Yes. Thank you for saying it. We're watching Microsoft et al. defeat open source. Large language models are used to aggregate and interpolate intellectual property. This is performed with no acknowledgement of authorship or lineage, with no attribution or citation. In effect, the intellectual property used to train such models becomes anonymous common property. The social rewards (e.g., credit, respect) that often mo…
Can you name a company with more OSS projects and contributors? Stop with the hyperbole...
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
To "cut a deal" is a common (American?) English idiom meaning to "make a deal". But agree that it's better to avoid using idioms on a site that has many visitors for whom English is not their first language.
Do you mean that Bloomberg should have used a different title or Hacker News should have modified the title?
I think Bloomberg’s at fault: “cut a deal” isn’t usually that ambiguous because it’s clear which state transition is more likely. But here it’s plausible they could’ve been ending some existing training-data-sharing agreement, or that they were making a new different deal. Also the fact it’s pluralised here makes it different enough to the most common form for it to be a bit harder to notice the idiom. But since we can’t change the fact they used that title, I would like HN to change it now.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
To "cut a deal" is a common (American?) English idiom meaning to "make a deal". But agree that it's better to avoid using idioms on a site that has many visitors for whom English is not their first language.
Do you mean that Bloomberg should have used a different title or Hacker News should have modified the title?
[deleted]
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
The speed with which AI models are improving blows my mind. Humans quickly normalize technological progress, but it's staggering to reflect on our progress over just these two years .
I wonder how long people will still protest in these threads that "It doesn't know anything! It's just an autocomplete parrot!" Because.. yea, it is. However.. it keeps expanding, it keeps getting more useful. Yea people and especially companies are using it for things which it has no business being involved in.. and despite that it keeps growing, it keeps progressing. I do find the "stochastic parrot" comments slowl…
The "statistical parrot" parrots have been demonstrably wrong for years (see e.g. LeCun et al[1]). It's just harder to ignore reality with hundreds of millions of people now using incredible new AI tools. We're approaching "don't believe your lying eyes" territory. Deniers will continue pretending that LLMs are just an NFT-level fad or bubble or whatever. The AI revolution will continue to pass them by. More's the pity.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#156If you want to destroy open source completely, the more models the better. Microsoft's co-opting and infiltration of OSS projects will serve as a textbook example of eliminating competition in MBA programs. And people still support it by uploading to GitHub.
I don't understand the case being made here at all. AI is violating FOSS licenses, I totally agree. But you can write more FOSS using AI. It's totally unfair, because these companies are not sharing their source, and extracting all of the value from FOSS as they can. Fine. But when it comes to OSI Open Source, all they usually had to do was include a text file somewhere mentioning that they used it in order to do the same thing, and when it comes to Free Software, they could just lie about stealing it and/or fly under the radar.
Free software needs more user-facing software, and it needs people other than coders to drive development (think UI people, subject matter specialists, etc.), and AI will help that. While I think what the AI companies are doing is tortious, and that they either should be stopped from doing it or the entire idea of software copyright should be re-examined, I also think that AI will be massively beneficial for Free Software.
I also suspect that this could result in a grand bargain in some court (which favors the billionaires of course) where the AI companies have to pay into a fund of some sort that will be used to pay for FOSS to be created and maintained.
Lastly, maybe Free Software developers should start zipping up all of the OSI licenses that only require that a license be included in the distribution and including that zipfile with their software written in collaboration with AI copilots. That and your latest GPL for the rest (and for your own code) puts you in as safe a place as you could possibly be legally. You'll still be hit by all of the "don't do evil"-style FOSS-esque licenses out there, but you'll at least be safer than all of the proprietary software being written with AI.
I don't know what textbook directs you to eliminate all of your competition by lowering your competition's costs, narrowing your moat of expertise, and not even owning a piece of that.
edit: that being said, I'm obviously talking about Free Software here, and not Open Source. Wasn't Open Source only protected by spirits anyway?
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bullshit. Claude 3.5 Sonnet owns the competition according to the most useful benchmark: operating a robot body in the real world. No other model comes close.
This seems incorrect. I don't need Claude 3.5 Sonnet to operate a robot body for me, and don't know anyone else who does. And general-purpose robotics is not going to be the most efficient way to have robots do many tasks ever, and certainly not in the short term.
Of course not but the task requires excellent image understanding, large context window, a mix of structured and unstructured output, high level and spatial reasoning, and a conversational layer on top.
I find it’s predictive of relative performance in other tasks I use LLMs for. Claude is the best. The only shortcoming is its peculiar verbosity.
Definitely superior to anything OpenAI has and miles beyond the “open weights” alternatives like Llama.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
To "cut a deal" is a common (American?) English idiom meaning to "make a deal". But agree that it's better to avoid using idioms on a site that has many visitors for whom English is not their first language.
Do you mean that Bloomberg should have used a different title or Hacker News should have modified the title?
[deleted]
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think "Claude" is also a bad name. If I knew nothing else, am I picking OpenAI or Claude based on the name? I'm going with OpenAI
Claude is a product name, OpenAI is a company name. You really think Claude is better than ChatGPT?
This brings up the broader question: why are AI companies so bad at naming their products?
All the OpenAI model names look like garbled nonsense to the layperson, while Anthropic is a bit of a mixed bag too. I'm not sure what image Claude is supposed to conjure, Sonnet is a nice name if it's packaged as a creative writing tool but less so for developers. Meta AI is at least to the point, though not particularly interesting as far as names go.
Gemini is kind of cool sounding, aiming for the associations of playful/curious of that zodiac sign. And the Gemini models are about as unreliable as astrology is for practical use, so I guess that name makes the most sense.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#160History has shown being first to market isn't all it's cut out to be. You spend more, it's more difficult creating the trail others will follow, you end up with a tech stack that was built before tools and patterns stabilized and you've created a giant super highway for a fast-follower. Anyone remember MapQuest, AltaVista or Hotmail? OpenAI has some very serious competition now. When you combine that with the recent…
[deleted]