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

Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

tobi.knaup.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 346 posts

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#221

Post by theshrike79 »

xdennis wrote: post #212
theshrike79 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would ”who won the 2020 election” be a similar canary for American models?

How is that in any way equivalent? The American government/legislature doesn't force you to adopt any particular view of the 2020 election. You can say Biden won or you can say it was defrauded by dead people and Trump actually won. You're allowed to say either one and you can train an LLM to say either one.

...have you seen the current administration being grilled by congress members?

They are actually properly unable to say "Biden won the 2020 election" because that's against Dear Leader's views. They will say anything similar like "was confirmed as...", but those exact words will NEVER come out of their mouth.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#222

Post by dan_linder »

isityettime wrote: post #138
kloop wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “The source described leading AI labs or their allies approaching the administration every 3-5 months with an idea to ban open-source models.” That's going to hit first amendment grounds pretty quick, the same way that software in general did. The modern version of the decss flag will be a character that says "I think good weights are {...weights go here...}" They could, however, ban any payment to a chinese entity…

Uh, how big would such a flag have to be?

With a small enough font, about two American Eagles high, and four to five across.

This is where the next wave of lossless ultra-compression comes in - but I believe in Claude Shannon so that’s unlikely.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#223

Post by drnick1 »

stefan_ wrote: post #195
drnick1 wrote: post #146

> American labs need to release frontier-grade open-weight models under licenses that startups can actually build on. To be fair, OpenAI has released a couple of (then very good) OSS models. I run the 20B version at home and it is excellent for reviewing text and common tasks like drafting bash scripts. There is a larger 120B that you can't realistically run on consumer hardware at reasonable tok/s too. I wish OpenAI…

"We have been having extensive discussions around open source strategy. [..] one thing we'd like to do soon is to create a language model with the approximate capability of GPT-3 that can run locally [..]. In general, we think this helps discourage others from releasing similarly-powerful models, and makes it harder for new efforts to get funded." - Sam Altman emails OpenAI board, 2.5 years after GPT-3 Chinese releas…

> Chinese release open models to drive the state of the art

Are you sure it isn't just another form of Chinese industrial policy? China does not have frontier labs, but through distillation and their own work they can get pretty close. It's not enough to be competitive with Anthropic and OpenAI, but there is still money to be made by selling compute (software as a service), and in any case it's better than being left behind in the AI race.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#224

Post by ForHackernews »

petilon wrote: post #68
ForHackernews wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...good for them? We used to call that competition. Imagine making this argument with a straight face in any other industry: "The claim is that Japanese car companies are buying Ford vehicles, and then leasing them to American consumers at cut-rate prices. In return for the cheap cars, the customers are letting the Japanese observe their driving behavior, studying how they use their F-150 and then the Japanese car co…

> observe their driving behavior That's not what they are observing, it is the behavior of the engines.

:sigh:

fine, s/observing the way the Ford cars work

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#225

Post by [deleted] »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #168
kloop wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “The source described leading AI labs or their allies approaching the administration every 3-5 months with an idea to ban open-source models.” That's going to hit first amendment grounds pretty quick, the same way that software in general did. The modern version of the decss flag will be a character that says "I think good weights are {...weights go here...}" They could, however, ban any payment to a chinese entity…

That's going to hit first amendment grounds pretty quick, the same way that software in general did Don't count on that. "National security" == the cheat code for the US court system that instantly bypasses any First Amendment issues.

[deleted]

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#226

Post by m11a »

andriy_koval wrote: post #219
m11a wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Step 1: Chinese company publishes open weights on HF Step 2: European company distills or just adjusts the model slightly, and publishes its model on HF Step 3: American company uses model from step 2. Has to testify under oath where they got it from. "We got it from these French guys"

That French guy takes risk to be forever under US warrants for breaking American law, denied access to financial institutions even in Europe and will quickly go to some KYC entity list, and you will be notified as his clients to stop using his model. Or you think all kind of fraud can be committed through some "french guy"? Also, I am not confident, receiving illegal materials from French guy gates you from personal…

I presume such US legislation isn't going to try claim worldwide jurisdiction to block all persons worldwide from using Chinese models. In which case, the French guy wouldn't be violating American law.

As for the American company, it's pretty difficult to check the provedance of open weights. It's even difficult to check the provedance of open source code, because chains of attribution aren't always clear. I posted elsewhere that Anthropic's MCP Python SDK is a fork of an open source project with the attribution removed. We saw the same with Cursor's Composer model, which didn't attribute its Chinese base. It's very hard to claim an American company should be liable for using a purportedly European model with attribution removed.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#227

Post by satvikpendem »

amarant wrote: post #182
satvikpendem wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's simple, the US government will put any Chinese open model companies on the entity list which blocks any company which does business with the US from also doing business with the Chinese companies. This creates a chilling effect where even if it may be harder to tell, no US company will be able to provide or use any overt Chinese open model and won't even risk trying to go around as the punishments for trying to…

But that's just the thing with open weights: you're not doing any business with company that made the model. They might publish the weights to a, say, European host, and then you download the model from Europe and and run it on your servers in America, and suddenly it's very hard to tell where the model was originally created.

Companies, where OpenAI and Anthropic make much if not most of their revenue, will not risk it. You're thinking like an engineer not a business person, risk is fundamental to their calculus. They'll instead just use known provenance models like GPT or Claude, entrenching these companies further.

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#228

Post by [deleted] »

amarant wrote: post #182
satvikpendem wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's simple, the US government will put any Chinese open model companies on the entity list which blocks any company which does business with the US from also doing business with the Chinese companies. This creates a chilling effect where even if it may be harder to tell, no US company will be able to provide or use any overt Chinese open model and won't even risk trying to go around as the punishments for trying to…

But that's just the thing with open weights: you're not doing any business with company that made the model. They might publish the weights to a, say, European host, and then you download the model from Europe and and run it on your servers in America, and suddenly it's very hard to tell where the model was originally created.

[deleted]

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#229

Post by t0mpr1c3 »

satvikpendem wrote: post #171
ozgung wrote: post #126

Everyone is talking about banning Chinese models but nobody talks how it is feasible to ban them. I think it’s impossible simply because technically there is no such thing as a “Chinese model”. There is no way to tell apart an “American” model from a “Chinese” one by looking at their weights. Weights are just numbers and you can’t assign country of origin to numbers. One can find very easy workarounds to any naive at…

It's simple, the US government will put any Chinese open model companies on the entity list which blocks any company which does business with the US from also doing business with the Chinese companies. This creates a chilling effect where even if it may be harder to tell, no US company will be able to provide or use any overt Chinese open model and won't even risk trying to go around as the punishments for trying to…

It's hard to see how a statistical model can be banned, regardless of its origin. Is there a precedent for that?

Re: Open-weight AI is having its Kubernetes moment

#230

Post by holoduke »

ButlerianJihad wrote: post #186
holoduke wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All censorship whether it's tienanmen, sex nudity, violence etc are happening in a very thin layer of the model. It's easily bypassed. I use all open models without any censorship. I can easily ask how to make a nuclear bomb or how to build my own meth lab at home with a super details step by step list.

Have you followed the steps, though? Last year I asked some ordinary commercial LLM if it could draw me the schematics of a device like Little Boy from WWII. And it complied very nicely. Got a very detailed schematic graphic. Suitable for framing. Perhaps not quite suitable for reconstruction.

No I haven't. And I am sure there are flaws in the guide for a nuclear bomb. But a meth lab at home is definitely doable. Would not recommend it
Post reply on HN