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

Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 337 posts

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#181

Post by thewebguyd »

Spartan-S63 wrote: post #148
davkan wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those salaries seem low for mid sized cities even no?

I think they're generalizing beyond software engineers with what they're saying. G&A, Marketing, etc roles pay significantly less than software engineers and that $55-75k figure is realistic in lower cost of living areas. Even in Colorado, which the Denver Metro Area is HCOL, there are companies (smaller, regional, not national/global) still offering that level of salary.

Yeah, correct, I wasn't thinking of devs specifically, more other office/administrative roles threatened by automation. Even where I live in a relatively HCOL area, any non-dev office role you can still expect to see a$65-$80k salary range, and $80k is pushing toward the top end for non tech roles.

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#182

Post by midnightbobarun »

christina97 wrote: post #9

I wonder what is happening behind closed doors for these companies to be issuing such a joint letter.

Nvidia benefits no matter what because their hardware is being used. Microsoft and Meta benefit by making sure that the gap between "Anthropic/OpenAI" and "everyone else" doesn't widen, or they'll be hopelessly dependent on those frontier labs.

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#184

Post by monster_truck »

DrewADesign wrote: post #179
mwigdahl wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fully loaded cost of employees at that salary level is likely over $100K. You may still be right on the relative expenses, but you can't just look at the top-level salary line.

There are a lot of unknowns. It will probably be harder to get an acceptable quality outcome in most fields than in the text-based, limited vocabulary, comparatively highly structured, granularly documented, relatively unambiguous world of code. For the ones where it’s even possible with our current approach, the economics might not even be feasible to provide the service. Based on how much money these companies need…

??? These are not unknowns. It is pretty well documented how much more an employee costs over their outright comp

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#185

Post by thewebguyd »

tentahedronic wrote: post #159
idiotsecant wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

55k??

That is a completely normal programmer salary in many countries, Silicon valley wages are just nuts. For example in Finland 55k before taxes is pretty good for ordinary non-wizard guy who can code, if you are a junior 40k is more realistic (and finding job in the first place can be a huge chaĺlenge..).

It's also a completely normal salary for non-dev, non-IT roles in most of the US that aren't major HCoL cities, which are the roles I was referring too mostly where the cost tradeoff of AI vs. Hiring humans isn't as clear cut as the labs marketing departments want everyone to believe.

Even in the US, only about 23% of workers earn $100k/year or more.

According to the US BLS, the median income for "knowledge workers" is ~$65k-$72k/year.

People in SF, NYC, etc. live completely different lives from the rest of the country.

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#186

Post by Razengan »

Wait.. If "distillation" produces better results than the "original" models, why don't the US model owners do it to themselves?

Have ChatGPT 5.6 talk to itself to produce 5.7 or whatever?

And since they already know which requests came from China or looked like distillation, can't they just replay those same prompts?

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#187

Post by 1-6 »

midnightbobarun wrote: post #182
christina97 wrote: post #9

I wonder what is happening behind closed doors for these companies to be issuing such a joint letter.

Nvidia benefits no matter what because their hardware is being used. Microsoft and Meta benefit by making sure that the gap between "Anthropic/OpenAI" and "everyone else" doesn't widen, or they'll be hopelessly dependent on those frontier labs.

I'm not certain about this statement because Huawei created their own chip.

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#188

Post by thewebguyd »

jackb4040 wrote: post #143
Jagerbizzle wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"leveraging their infra" is a pretty solid play, considering the scope of investments these two companies have made thus far.

It does however totally abandon the question of making a profitable mass-market AI product upon which the scale of those investments was based.

Not entirely, if models become commodity, then Microsoft's play as an infrastructure & enterprise apps company is the better bet. They don't need to make profitable mass-market AI models, they just need the best tooling on top of any model their customers pick, remaining fully model agnostic.

"AI Product" doesn't necessarily mean "We sell API access to a our models." Ton of companies out there itching to buy a commercial off the shelf product to deliver whatever AI capabilities they need packaged in a nice GUI, with enterprise governance controls, without needing a dev team/team of engineers to integrate it or develop harnesses, etc.

Buy it->have IT click a few buttons in an admin console->Deploy and have it be immediately useful is the play.

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#189

Post by mathisfun123 »

torginus wrote: post #154
novaleaf wrote: post #141

Some irony: I subscribe to Claude and Codex (20x plans), and now Kimi. Why Kimi? because K3 is the only frontier model I can have a serious conversation with about my product's security. (I did apply for OpenAi's Cyber Pilot but got no response)

The product strategy of 'consumer-grade' AI making deliberately insecure software, and then selling you limited access to the model that can fix it (if they think you deserve to pay them) is just diabolical. (Grade 3 AI which can hack both previous tiers is exclusively sold to the highest bidder.)

[flagged]

Re: Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta warn against overregulating open-weight models

#190

Post by largbae »

TheBicPen wrote: post #161
moralestapia wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. No law prevents you from provisioning and using your own hardware.

There absolutely are laws restricting what hardware you are allowed to use. e.g. https://www.fcc.gov/faqs-recent-updates-fcc-covered-list-reg...

This argument would make more sense if the cloud providers used these devices but you were not allowed to.
Post reply on HN