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

AI is a business model stress test

dri.es

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 361 posts

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#181

Post by gedy »

troupo wrote: post #150
azangru wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people prefer it over CSS modules? They also solve the style containment problem, and do not require any effort to set up, or any additional library to learn?

You're probably confusing something with something? CSS Modules are a JS-only third party solution re-invented/re-implemented in a dozen different ways for various JS frontend frameworks. Requires setting up, requires learning an additional library. If you mean these CSS modules: https://github.com/css-modules/css-modules?tab=readme-ov-fil... then they need to be supported by whatever build chain you use. And you lit…

> CSS Modules are a JS-only third party solution re-invented/re-implemented in a dozen different ways for various JS frontend frameworks. Requires setting up, requires learning an additional library.

I mean, Tailwind is not that different here - you must use a build tool to tree shake the styles, etc.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#183

Post by 4nonverbal-alit »

azangru wrote: post #98
heliumtera wrote: post #21

Tailwind Labs relied on a weird monetization scheme. Revenue was proportional to the pain of using the framework. The sudden improvement in getting desired UI without relying on pre-built templates killed Tailwind Labs. There are many initiatives in a similar spot, improving your experience at using Next.js would hurt Vercel. Making GitHub actions runners more reliable, stable and economical would hurt Microsoft. Imp…

> If suddenly CSS became pleasant to use, Tailwind would be in a rough spot. CSS is pleasant to use. I know I find it pleasant to use; and I know there are quite a few frontend developers who do too. I didn't pay much attention to tailwind, until suddenly I realized that it has spread like wildfire and now is everywhere. What drove that growth? Which groups were the first adopters of tailwind; how did they grow; when…

Tailwind is just bootstrap with marketing budget

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#184

Post by zephen »

Terr_ wrote: post #94
LPisGood wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s a pretty easy principle that machines are not people and people learning should be treated differently than machines learning

You see this principle in privacy laws too. I can be in a room looking at something with my eyeballs and listening with my ears perfectly legally... But it would not be legal if I replaced myself with a humanoid mannequin with a video camera for a head.

You can even write down what you are looking at and listening to, although in some cases, dissemination of, e.g. verbatim copies in your writing could be considered copying.

But it is automatically copying if you use a copier.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#185

Post by dustingetz »

azangru wrote: post #98
heliumtera wrote: post #21

Tailwind Labs relied on a weird monetization scheme. Revenue was proportional to the pain of using the framework. The sudden improvement in getting desired UI without relying on pre-built templates killed Tailwind Labs. There are many initiatives in a similar spot, improving your experience at using Next.js would hurt Vercel. Making GitHub actions runners more reliable, stable and economical would hurt Microsoft. Imp…

> If suddenly CSS became pleasant to use, Tailwind would be in a rough spot. CSS is pleasant to use. I know I find it pleasant to use; and I know there are quite a few frontend developers who do too. I didn't pay much attention to tailwind, until suddenly I realized that it has spread like wildfire and now is everywhere. What drove that growth? Which groups were the first adopters of tailwind; how did they grow; when…

backend devs needing to be fullstack but consider frontend to be beneath them

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#186

Post by zephen »

baxtr wrote: post #93
drivebyhooting wrote: post #4

In my opinion LLMs are intellectual property theft. Just as if I started distributing copies of books. This substantially reduces the incentive for the creation of new IP. All written text, art work, etc needs to come imbued with a GPL style license: if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published.

This is one way to look at it. The other way is to argue that LLMs democratize access to knowledge. Anyone has access to all ever written by humanity. Crazy impressive if you ask me.

Yes, it seems that way now.

The first one's free.

After you're hooked, and don't know how to think any more for yourself, and all the primary sources have folded, the deal will be altered.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#187

Post by GrowingSideways »

drivebyhooting wrote: post #4

In my opinion LLMs are intellectual property theft. Just as if I started distributing copies of books. This substantially reduces the incentive for the creation of new IP. All written text, art work, etc needs to come imbued with a GPL style license: if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published.

Intellectual property was kind of a gimmick to begin with, though. Let's not pretend like copyright and patents made any sense to begin with

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#188

Post by antihipocrat »

baxtr wrote: post #93
drivebyhooting wrote: post #4

In my opinion LLMs are intellectual property theft. Just as if I started distributing copies of books. This substantially reduces the incentive for the creation of new IP. All written text, art work, etc needs to come imbued with a GPL style license: if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published.

This is one way to look at it. The other way is to argue that LLMs democratize access to knowledge. Anyone has access to all ever written by humanity. Crazy impressive if you ask me.

If the entities democratizing access weren't companies worth hundreds of billions of dollars with a requirement to prioritize substantial returns for their investors, I'd agree with you!

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#189

Post by zephen »

venndeezl wrote: post #101
drivebyhooting wrote: post #4

In my opinion LLMs are intellectual property theft. Just as if I started distributing copies of books. This substantially reduces the incentive for the creation of new IP. All written text, art work, etc needs to come imbued with a GPL style license: if you train your model on this, your weights and training code must be published.

In my opinion information wants to be free. It's wild to me seeing the tech world veer into hyper-capitalism and IP protectionism. Complete 180 from the 00s. IMO copyright laws should be rewritten to bring copyright inline with the rest of the economy. Plumbers are not claiming use fees from the pipes they installed a decade ago. Doctor isn't getting paid by a 70 year old for saving the 70 year old when they were in…

> In my opinion information wants to be free.

Information has zero desires.

> It's wild to me seeing the tech world veer into hyper-capitalism and IP protectionism.

Really? Where have you been the last 50 years?

> Plumbers are not claiming use fees from the pipes they installed a decade ago.

Plumbers also don't discount the job on the hopes they can sell more, or just go around installing random pipes in random locations hoping they can convince someone to pay them.

> Why should intellectual property authors be given extreme ownership over behavior then?

The position that cultural artifacts should enter into the commons sooner rather than later is not unreasonable by any means, but most software is not cultural, requires heavy maintenance for the duration of its life, and still is well past obsolescence, gone and forgotten, well before the time frame you are discussing.

Re: AI is a business model stress test

#190

Post by zephen »

venndeezl wrote: post #115
drivebyhooting wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excuse me, but even if in principle of “information wants to be free”, the actual outcome of LLMs is the opposite of democratizing information and access. It completely centralizes accesses, censorship, and profits in the hands of a few mega corporations. It is completely against the spirit of information wants to be free. Using that catch phrase in protection of mega corps is a travesty.

LLMs are just a concept, an abstraction. A data type for storing data. The actual problem is political. Has nothing to do with LLMs.

> LLMs are just a concept, an abstraction. A data type for storing data.

C'mon. You know good and well that what is being discussed is the _use_ of LLMs, with the concomitant heavy usage of CPU, storage, and bandwidth that the average user has no hope of matching.

Post reply on HN