Live data from Hacker News

White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

wdtn.com

31–40 of 65 posts

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#31

Regulating open-source AI will only help giants like Google and OpenAI, stifling innovation. It creates barriers only they can afford, limiting competition and diversity. Open-source fosters transparency and rapid progress. We do not need government regulations, or we'll end up like Europe with China leading.

that doesn't explain why the white house doesn't see the need to regulate it - if anything it gives them more reason to.

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#32
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sorry, I’m no JD Vance fan but what on earth do you mean he was installed by Silicon Valley? Who installed him, and where did they install him to? Do you mean “Silicon Valley” installed him as Trump’s VP pick? Or just that SV installed him as one of two senators from Ohio — in which case, how did they do that, and more importantly why would they choose a senator from Ohio instead of California? I know Vance is friend…

[deleted]

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#33
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sorry, I’m no JD Vance fan but what on earth do you mean he was installed by Silicon Valley? Who installed him, and where did they install him to? Do you mean “Silicon Valley” installed him as Trump’s VP pick? Or just that SV installed him as one of two senators from Ohio — in which case, how did they do that, and more importantly why would they choose a senator from Ohio instead of California? I know Vance is friend…

[deleted]

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#34
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sorry, I’m no JD Vance fan but what on earth do you mean he was installed by Silicon Valley? Who installed him, and where did they install him to? Do you mean “Silicon Valley” installed him as Trump’s VP pick? Or just that SV installed him as one of two senators from Ohio — in which case, how did they do that, and more importantly why would they choose a senator from Ohio instead of California? I know Vance is friend…

By SV, I think he might mean Peter Thiel and his associates: https://archive.is/1oVs2

"Narya was backed with about $100mn from Thiel and a cadre of his acquaintances, including former Google chief executive Eric Schmidt and prominent venture capitalists Marc Andreessen and Scott Dorsey."

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds sarcastic, but as is often the case the White House has quite competent people working on this who have put a lot of thought into it already: https://www.ntia.gov/federal-register-notice/2024/dual-use-f... Unfortunately it's past the deadline for you to add your own comments on this, but I'm sure there will be future RFCs if you have thoughts.

In the spirit of this pedantry I’d like to point out that the NTIA is not the White House.

The NTIA "serves as the president's principal adviser" in its field.

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#36
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sorry, I’m no JD Vance fan but what on earth do you mean he was installed by Silicon Valley? Who installed him, and where did they install him to? Do you mean “Silicon Valley” installed him as Trump’s VP pick? Or just that SV installed him as one of two senators from Ohio — in which case, how did they do that, and more importantly why would they choose a senator from Ohio instead of California? I know Vance is friend…

GP is likely referring to Peter Thiel’s circle. Cance worked for Thiel for a little while. Here is a detailed article on their involvement in the Vance selection: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/07/28/jd-vanc...

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#37
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sorry, I’m no JD Vance fan but what on earth do you mean he was installed by Silicon Valley? Who installed him, and where did they install him to? Do you mean “Silicon Valley” installed him as Trump’s VP pick? Or just that SV installed him as one of two senators from Ohio — in which case, how did they do that, and more importantly why would they choose a senator from Ohio instead of California? I know Vance is friend…

you can just search keywords: jd vance + thiel and educate yourself, it is well known

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#38
post #3
post #2

Might change after getting lobbying checks from Google, Microsoft and Apple.

Why? All three of those companies have an obvious and outspoken commitment to releasing models for free, they aren't trying to manipulate fear to sell a product like OpenAI.

Really makes me wonder what the angle here is for them. With open source, I can somewhat understand given market standards become easier to hire for and you get feedback on your tooling. It seems unlikely that either will be true for open-weight models. It also seems unlikely they would be able to establish market domination and then increase prices if everything remains open.

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I’m no JD Vance fan but what on earth do you mean he was installed by Silicon Valley? Who installed him, and where did they install him to? Do you mean “Silicon Valley” installed him as Trump’s VP pick? Or just that SV installed him as one of two senators from Ohio — in which case, how did they do that, and more importantly why would they choose a senator from Ohio instead of California? I know Vance is friend…

The Elon and Thiel gang, they are not pro "SV" insomuch as being pro Thiel/Elon oligopolies. If open source AI one day threatens their livelihoods and career, the tune from the WH will change overnight. Right now the SV conservatives are playing catch up on AI so they are happy to push for laissez-faire instead of regulatory capture. I won't be suprised that should the cost of running and finetuning FB Llama models b…

[deleted]

Re: White House says no need to restrict 'open-source' AI at least for now

#40
post #28

Good. Effective Austruism is trying to destroy democratic institutions and it's likely a bigger threat to society than fascism. The pro-progress people needs to organize themselves to stop types like SBF from giving AI to China.

Can you elaborate on what you're referring to?
Post reply on HN