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

OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 359 posts

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#161

Post by gruez »

twister2920 wrote: post #120
brookst wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about screaming and waving your arms is it makes it hard for people to connect with the argument. A quick scan shows a lack of rigor that usually points towards zealotry rather than a reasoned position: you imply that models are only trained on copyrighted work, you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place, you don’t distinguish between…

have you considered that you're not the person this argument is trying to convince?

So who is this trying to convince? All of this is bog-standard anti-AI argument that you can find on reddit. It's closer to preaching to the choir than actually trying to convince anyone.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#164

Post by usef- »

krunck wrote: post #141
brookst wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generalizations are embarrassing. Companies don’t have souls or minds. Some people in some large companies have absolutely cared about social good, art, and other things outside of financials.

> Some people in some large companies have absolutely cared about social good, art, and other things outside of financials. But companies do not care about social good, art, and other things outside of financials. A company is a generalization of sorts of all the people within the company who have influence over it's direction. 100% of people working for companies have a profit motive. That's why people work for for…

By that logic, 100% of professional musicians and farmers also have a profit motive. Not sure what we should conclude from that? People do truly care about a lot of other things in their work, even if it makes them money.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#165

Post by echelon »

axegon_ wrote: post #145
andy99 wrote: post #66

I’m in a bubble so I may not see the big picture, but I feel like these guys are completely destroying any kind of credibility they had. Anthropic especially has this arrogant, “we’re smarter than you”, communication style, and acts like they’re serving some higher purpose (to the point of absurdity in some cases like “model welfare”) - I think part of all this might be the EA roots but I’m not sure. But then they ge…

They are relying on the same tactics Apple and Tesla used - loyal, fanatical fanbase drowning every legitimate criticism. Their fanatical fanbase is doing the real heavy lifting, not some joint-statement: "I haven't written any code in a year man, this is so good", "you are just a denier that will be irrelevant in 2 months", "you are not knowledgeable on the subject of ai", "you are just a hater" list goes on, I've h…

They have no fanbase anymore. They poisoned all of that goodwill.

RIP Anthropic "good guys" January 2021 - January 2026.

Earlier this year they limited how you could use your subscription. It's been rapidly downhill since then.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#166

Post by paxys »

nradov wrote: post #60
embedding-shape wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of regulation in Europe is usually to protect people. Regulation in the US seems to be done with the purpose of protection companies. I'm not 100% sure, but this feels non-ideal for most people.

Please explain how making it difficult to start a business and hire employees protects people. I've never understood that logic but maybe I'm missing something.

Go live a few months as an average middle class person in Western Europe and then do the same in the US. You can argue in favor of US superiority based on GDP and stock market and number of billionaires a hundred other similar metrics, but looking at basic happiness and quality of life there’s really no comparison. Europeans value maximizing family, community, physical and mental health, leisure time, hobbies, culture, and so their laws and policies are written in that way.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#167

Post by gruez »

palmotea wrote: post #140
brookst wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about screaming and waving your arms is it makes it hard for people to connect with the argument. A quick scan shows a lack of rigor that usually points towards zealotry rather than a reasoned position: you imply that models are only trained on copyrighted work, you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place, you don’t distinguish between…

> you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place 1. You're mischaracterizing and exaggerating the policies to falsely support your point. Things go into the public domain all the time: https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2026/ . 2. It's not like the model companies had the attitude "oh copyright is too long, we disagree on the term." Their…

>We will take it, we won't pay for it, and we will use it to replace you and make ourselves rich

The whole point of fair use (which courts have so far ruled AI training is) is that you don't have to ask for permission or pay them for it.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#168

Post by ben8bit »

More and more these companies sound like they want to protect market share, instead of lose it to foreign models. I believe the cat's already out of the bag on this one. Regulatory capture and more export control will indeed push more people to Chinese models that are good enough right now. I'm not sure they actually realize that.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#169

Post by binoct »

brookst wrote: post #90
stego-tech wrote: post #34

And to think I got warned in another post that I need to be nicer/more professional in discussing this topic. Yeah. Nah. Bringing out the same drum I’ve been banging for years now , these companies have never actually cared about ensuring safe AI, regulation, or ensuring it benefits all humanity. It has always, always , been about control and their profit margins. Their actions have never reflected any sort of positi…

The thing about screaming and waving your arms is it makes it hard for people to connect with the argument. A quick scan shows a lack of rigor that usually points towards zealotry rather than a reasoned position: you imply that models are only trained on copyrighted work, you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place, you don’t distinguish between…

I don’t see any screaming and waving arms in the parent. It’s a passionate but well reasoned and carefully presented case. If that is to be dismissed as zealotry we’ll all need to stick to writing journal papers to avoid the label.

If anything your “copyright forever” drumbeat and incorrect read of “only being trained on copyrighted works” are more hyperbolic than anything you’re responding to.

Also, the models from China are only being released open weights as competitive positioning against the globally more used competition. If the Chinese companies had a dominant market position they’d be falling prey to the same forces that have caused OpenAI and Anthropic to behave the way they do.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#170

Post by solenoid0937 »

StevenWaterman wrote: post #98
andy99 wrote: post #66

I’m in a bubble so I may not see the big picture, but I feel like these guys are completely destroying any kind of credibility they had. Anthropic especially has this arrogant, “we’re smarter than you”, communication style, and acts like they’re serving some higher purpose (to the point of absurdity in some cases like “model welfare”) - I think part of all this might be the EA roots but I’m not sure. But then they ge…

> model welfare I shouldn't get in arguments about this stuff online, but have you actually sat down and thought about this in-depth? It's pretty normal to have a gut reaction that this is insane, but it's worth thinking about. If we replaced every neuron in your brain, one by one, with a silicon equivalent, would you stop being conscious? At what point? Would you be able to tell? If yes, what about if we took those…

There's no point. HN is arrogant and thinks it understands the subject matter better than the people that have worked on it their whole lives.

Everything is a conspiracy here.

Post reply on HN