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

John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 515 posts

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#211

Post by nitwit005 »

SirensOfTitan wrote: post #46

In my mind, AI is making a lot of engineers, including Carmack, seem fairly thoughtless. At the other moments in recent history where technology has displaced workers, labor has either had to fight some very bloody battles or had stronger labor organization. Tech workers are highly atomized now, and if you have to work to live, you're negotiating on your own. It seems like Carmack, like a lot of tech people, have for…

I'm not aware of any labor efforts that have successfully fought automation long term.

There's been plenty of temporary victories, but even the unions often acknowledge it's temporary.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#212

Post by nitwit005 »

charcircuit wrote: post #146
dminik wrote: post #36

Surely we can all agree that there is a difference between: - Sharing/working on something for free with the hopes that others like it and maybe co tribute back. - Sharing something for free so that a giant corporation can make several trillion dollars and use my passion to train a machine for (including, but not limited to) drone striking a school.

If someone wants just the former they shouldn't make it open source.

How will someone contribute back without the code?

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#213

Post by NuclearPM »

arjie wrote: post #108

Has anyone else noticed a cultural shift around monetization of output? I think there wasn't as much back when I first started using open-source programs, both as a user, and a small-time contributor for decades now. And I've noticed this on other things too. A short while ago, someone on Reddit pointed out that something on Google Maps was wrong and so I went and submitted a fix and told them how to and I received a…

The MIT license didn’t require a lot of thought.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#214

Post by [deleted] »

tw04 wrote: post #89
j-bos wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's rhymes with people getting mad about pharmacos charging outrageous prices for life saving drugs they developed in order to charge outrageous prices. In both cases (drugs and OSS) it's an ugly process that produces great and greatly uneven value to humanity, but the alternatives are less value overall, even to those on the losing side of the uneven value.

>it's an ugly process that produces great and greatly uneven value to humanity That'd be far more believable if it weren't for the fact a vast majority of the research is publicly funded for those drug companies. They have no issues selling their drugs for less money in other markets while still turning a profit. And there's absolutely no indication they'd cease to exist with just outrageous profits, not "crippling e…

[deleted]

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#215

Post by socalgal2 »

skrebbel wrote: post #91

This is because Carmack doesn't really do OSS, he just does code dumps and tacks on a license ("a gift"). That's of course great and awesome and super nice, but he's not been painstakingly and thanklessly maintaining some key linux component for the last 20 years or something like that. It's an entirely different thing; he made a thing, sold it, and then when he couldn't sell more of it, gave it away. That's nice! Bu…

I have the same attitude as Carmack. I have several libraries and sites I maintain as well as contributing to several popular open source projects. I still have his attitude about this. Both my open source and my ongoing maintenance are gifts. I'm also free to stop giving when I don't feel like it.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#216

Post by Sol- »

gensym wrote: post #14

I find it pretty simple: - OSS is valuable for decentralizing power and influence - AI as it is being developed is likely to centralize it

> AI as it is being developed is likely to centralize it

The access to AI is centralized, but the ability to generate code and customized tools on demand for whatever personal project you have certainly democratizes Software.

And even though open source models are a year behind, they address your remaining criticism about the AI being centralized.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#217

Post by crote »

dahrkael wrote: post #105
sublinear wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not even the profit, but that there is often no new code being contributed. AI provides an offramp for people to disengage from social coding. People don't see the point because they still don't understand the difference between barely getting something to work and meaningfully improving that thing with new ideas.

if no code is contributed back then why is there an ongoing problem with massive amounts of PRs?

[flagged]

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#218

Post by crote »

elteto wrote: post #154
jraph wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> presumably, people who open source their code do not care about profit That's not true. There are business models around open source, and many companies making money from open source work. (I'm only reacting to this specific part of your comment)

I think you are splitting hairs. Yes those models “exist”, if by exist you mean they have dual-licensing setups with different tiers (community, professional, etc). The point is that most individuals who open source their code do so without expecting financial returns from it. In that context, whether Carmack has a $1 or $1e9 doesn’t make a difference.

You're forgetting about Red Hat & friends, where the software is 100% open source and the for-profit product is actually the support contract.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#219

Post by malfist »

Aurornis wrote: post #178
arjie wrote: post #108

Has anyone else noticed a cultural shift around monetization of output? I think there wasn't as much back when I first started using open-source programs, both as a user, and a small-time contributor for decades now. And I've noticed this on other things too. A short while ago, someone on Reddit pointed out that something on Google Maps was wrong and so I went and submitted a fix and told them how to and I received a…

> A short while ago, someone on Reddit pointed out that something on Google Maps was wrong and so I went and submitted a fix and told them how to and I received a barrage of comments about working for free for a corporation that's making money off me. Did you respond by asking them how Reddit makes money? The anti-corporate mentality isn't new, but it does surface in different ways and communities over time. The Redd…

Hell, reddit hates on reddit all the time. Spez in particular is hated across the board.

Agree that they largely don't change behavior. Although I will say, I've not logged into my account since the API shenanigans and don't regularly visit the site anymore. I'm mostly just on here and fark.

Post reply on HN