211–220 of 742 posts
That’s a strange usage of the word “cuts”. I thought GitHub terminated the deals with Google and Anthropic. It would be better if the title were GitHub signs AI deals instead of cuts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 w…
For example, even the new 3.5 Sonnet can't solve this reliably:
> Doom Slayer needs to teleport from Phobos to Deimos. He has his pet bunny, his pet cacodemon, and a UAC scientist who tagged along. The Doom Slayer can only teleport with one of them at a time. But if he leaves the bunny and the cacodemon together alone, the bunny will eat the cacodemon. And if he leaves the cacodemon and the scientist alone, the cacodemon will eat the scientist. How should the Doom Slayer get himself and all his companions safely to Deimos?
In fact, not only its solution is wrong, but it can't figure out why it's wrong on its own if you ask it to self-check.
In contrast, GPT-4o always consistently gives the correct response.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Copilot can choke on my AGPL code on GitHub, that was used for training their proprietary models. I'm still salty about this, sadly looks like the world has largely moved on.
It really feels like a digital form of colonialism; they come in take everything, completely disregard the rules, ignore intellectual copyright laws (while you still have to obey them), but when you speak out against this suddenly you are a luddite that doesn't care about human progress.
> Silicon Knights had "deliberately and repeatedly copied thousands of lines of Epic Games' copyrighted code, and then attempted to conceal its wrongdoing by removing Epic Games' copyright notices and by disguising Epic Games' copyrighted code as Silicon Knights' own
> Epic Games prevailed against Silicon Knights' lawsuit, and won its counter-suit for $4.45 million on grounds of copyright infringement,
> following the loss of the court case, Silicon Knights filed for bankruptcy
That’s a strange usage of the word “cuts”. I thought GitHub terminated the deals with Google and Anthropic. It would be better if the title were GitHub signs AI deals instead of cuts.
There's no moat, none.
I'm really curious how can any company building models hope to have any meaningful return from their billion dollars investments, when few people leaving and getting enough azure credits can get create a competitor in few months.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use both Claude and ChatGPT/GPT-4o a lot. Claude, the model, definitely is 'better' than GPT-4o. But OpenAI provides a much more capable app in ChatGPT and an easier development platform. I would absolutely choose to use Claude as my model with ChatGPT if that happened (yes, I know it won't). ChatGPT as an app is just so far ahead: code interpreter, web search/fetch, fluid voice interaction, Custom GPTs, image gene…
Are there any good 3rd-party native frontend apps for Claude (on MacOS)? I mean something like ChatGPTs app, not an editor. I guess one option would be to just run Claude iPad app on MacOS.
It also features one-click installation, OpenAI integration, a hub for downloading and running local models, a spec-compatible API server, global "quick answer" shortcut, and more. Really can't recommend it enough!
That’s a strange usage of the word “cuts”. I thought GitHub terminated the deals with Google and Anthropic. It would be better if the title were GitHub signs AI deals instead of cuts.
If 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…
You mean people making contributions to solve problems and scratch each others' itches got displaced by people seeking social status and/or a do-at-your-own-pace accreditation outside of formal structures, to show to prospective employees? And now that LLMs start letting people solve their own coding problems, sidestepping their whole social game, the credit seekers complain because large corps did something they couldn't possibly have done?
I mean sure, their contributions were a critical piece - in aggregate - individually, any single piece of OSS code contributes approximately 0 value to LLM training. But they're somehow entitled to the reward for a vastly greater value someone is providing, just because they retroactively feel they contributed.
Or, looking from a different angle: what the complainers are saying is, they're sad they can't extract rent now that their past work became valuable for reasons they had no part in, and if they could turn back time, they'd happily rent-seek the shit out of their code, to the point of destroying LLMs as a possibility, and denying the world the value LLMs provided?
I have little sympathy for that argument. We've been calling out "copyright laundering" way before GPT-3 was a thing - those who don't like to contribute without capturing all the value for themselves should've moved off GitHub years ago. It's not like GitHub has any hold over OSS other than plain inertia (and the egos in the community - social signalling games create a network effect).
That’s a strange usage of the word “cuts”. I thought GitHub terminated the deals with Google and Anthropic. It would be better if the title were GitHub signs AI deals instead of cuts.
I'm assuming you're not a native speaker? (I'm not) - "to cut a deal" is a fairly common idiom that means to reach and agreement.