Live data from Hacker News

The AI Whale Fall and Open Source

minor.gripe

21–26 of 26 posts

Re: The AI Whale Fall and Open Source

#21
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Anthropic or OpenAI go bankrupt, is there any reason not to expect that the model weights will be sold to some other company as part of that bankruptcy procedure?

If that happened would the model weights even be worth anything? Clearly the generated tokens weren't good enough to customers to justify their price

You can sell them a lot cheaper if you didn't have to train the model yourself.

Re: The AI Whale Fall and Open Source

#23
post #5

I don’t get this idea that AI will go away at some point. We’ll still have all the self-hostable models even if there are no newly trained models for a while. There will be companies that make money hosting those and selling tokens at a profit. We already have a pretty good idea what that looks like. We’ll also have companies like Google and Meta where AI is not their main product, who get competitive benefit out of…

It's wishful thinking from people who want it to go away.

[flagged]

Re: The AI Whale Fall and Open Source

#24
post #7

For mechanical work–things like bumping versions, fixing failing tests, checking documentation for inconsistencies–the clankers have proven their worth (even before LLMs, anybody remember dependabot?)! The way to fix that, of course, is automated processes and mechanical guardrails. Automatic enforcement of style, automatic testing and linting and formatting–same as ever. We can use the whale fall tokens to build tha…

[dead]

Re: The AI Whale Fall and Open Source

#25
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that happened would the model weights even be worth anything? Clearly the generated tokens weren't good enough to customers to justify their price

You can sell them a lot cheaper if you didn't have to train the model yourself.

Im not sure thats true. Price per task is doubtlessly cheaper with glm 5.2 than opus or fable

Re: The AI Whale Fall and Open Source

#26
>> Most-all of the people I’ve talked to that are strongly anti-LLM and anti-AI are oddly silent on the subject of models like GLM 5.2 and other modern open-weight models that are “good enough” for assistance now, and in another year will likely be as good as Fable or 5.6 today. I suspect this is because they are larpers and aren’t actually keeping track of the technology.

It's really pointless to try to engage with that sort of attitude: I'm right and everyone who disagrees with me is just larpers but I'll go ahead and strawman them so I can have something to write about online. Why should I read that? To waste my time and feel insulted?

Btw, I'm not anti-AI, but one doesn't have to be, to be critical of the current LLM market, but hey, I'm just larping eh?

Post reply on HN