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

Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 983 posts

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#441

Post by echelon »

ThunderBee wrote: post #356
capevace wrote: post #350

I‘m not even sure what the argument for banning Chinese models/open weights even is supposed to be? 1. if it’s to stop hackers doing hacking things with „uncontrollable models“ then, well… they’re already doing something illegal to begin with, why would they care about breaking another law running these models? 2. if it’s to stop foreign actors, then that ban would not apply to them anyway 3. it’s not stopping distil…

You aren’t missing anything. There isn’t an actual argument, this is strictly an attempt at regulatory capture.

You wouldn't distill billions of dollars of SoftBank investment.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#442

Post by capevace »

ux266478 wrote: post #425
capevace wrote: post #350

I‘m not even sure what the argument for banning Chinese models/open weights even is supposed to be? 1. if it’s to stop hackers doing hacking things with „uncontrollable models“ then, well… they’re already doing something illegal to begin with, why would they care about breaking another law running these models? 2. if it’s to stop foreign actors, then that ban would not apply to them anyway 3. it’s not stopping distil…

> But thats also an admittance that the American labs can’t compete on merit anymore Merit was never competitive. Mass consumption habits select hard for cost, and this is an industry driven entirely by scaling factors. If you can scale for cheaper, you win. Ivy League-decorated researchers aren't doing RnD for free. The frontier labs can only go so cheap before they're so far in the red that VC gets cold feet. Leavi…

> Do you know what happens if that goes up in flames

I think in capitalism thats called a market correction?

> Do you understand how much money is tied up in the industry?

If the free market „virtue signaling“ no longer matters, then they could’ve also put a stop-gap on investment volume to protect the economy against over-reliance?

Or how about go full plan-economy and just dictate price per token until investors get their money back?

I’m joking around but of course I understand whats tied up in this. I just don’t see how banning open source models is helping any of that in the long run.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#443

Post by ux266478 »

munk-a wrote: post #391
jubilee33 wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there actually is a congnizant argument other than to protect investments. And of course they cant say that. You are using way to much logic in this. You are witnessing powerful people who are operating way outside the scope of their own abilities thrash around. AI isn't being stopped. Definitely not by people who value money. The inertia at this point is probably even too much for those who have some s…

> And of course they cant say that. It's hilarious because at this point it's clear they can say that. We've just had a coordinated talking points push that voter picture IDs should be required because "Olive Garden".

Well, that's them doing the same thing, yeah? They can't say that they want voter picture IDs for the real reason (partisan electoral strategy), so they have to constantly litigate electoral fraud and the whole parade.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#445

Post by lovich »

buzzerbetrayed wrote: post #413
johnnyApplePRNG wrote: post #358

[flagged]

[flagged]

They attacked our premier universities and think climate change isn’t real or worse “woke”.

Hell, he put RFK junior in charge of healthcare and he’s just completely anti science in favor of his various lunacies.

If you have opinions on these topics and need evidence spoon fed to you after the past year and a half activity then I assume you’re commenting in bad faith and just here to back up your king.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#446

Post by aleqs »

capevace wrote: post #433
jubilee33 wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there actually is a congnizant argument other than to protect investments. And of course they cant say that. You are using way to much logic in this. You are witnessing powerful people who are operating way outside the scope of their own abilities thrash around. AI isn't being stopped. Definitely not by people who value money. The inertia at this point is probably even too much for those who have some s…

> And of course they cant say that That’s what I don’t get tho, I think in today’s world they totally could? „We need to protect US investments as our entire economy depends on this market sector“ seems like something that would be soothing to me as an investor? It’s not like the big money givers can’t see that china is close, it’s been the news multiple times already. But taking active policy steps to protect agains…

I think you are confusing the tiny amount of people who are actually investors or stand to directly benefit from these companies with the overall population - the overall population being generally against AI at this point.

'We must protect VC profits at the cost of the rest of the economy and our entire 'free market' system' probably doesn't sound as good.

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#447

Post by verdverm »

jgbuddy wrote: post #322
verdverm wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are you accessing K3? If it is through Moonshot's API, then there is very likely guardrails, because it seems like it wanted to answer and was then cutoff. We are starting to get access to K3 from US providers now, curious if they exhibit the same response pattern?

this was kimi 'instant' on kimi.com through their chat, looking now it's probably not k3 but still one of their models nonetheless

[flagged]

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#448

Post by staticman2 »

echelon wrote: post #441
ThunderBee wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren’t missing anything. There isn’t an actual argument, this is strictly an attempt at regulatory capture.

You wouldn't distill billions of dollars of SoftBank investment.

Is "You wouldn't distill..." the hot new Twitter meme or something?

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#449

Post by chews »

1234letshaveatw wrote: post #147
chews wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, what happened to no holds barred American capitalism? Is it bad when the Chinese somehow do it better? The US stateowning US Steal, Intel, and possibly openai is no different than the Chinese ownership model… and before the US took stakes in the companies they were just bankrolling them as customers SpaceX Oracle etal. If life is a meritocracy, you gotta give it to the Chinese for their immense growth and improv…

"what happened to no holds barred American capitalism?" you mean the strawman that never existed?

Unlike the xenophobia

Re: Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI

#450

Post by techjamie »

capevace wrote: post #350

I‘m not even sure what the argument for banning Chinese models/open weights even is supposed to be? 1. if it’s to stop hackers doing hacking things with „uncontrollable models“ then, well… they’re already doing something illegal to begin with, why would they care about breaking another law running these models? 2. if it’s to stop foreign actors, then that ban would not apply to them anyway 3. it’s not stopping distil…

How would it even be stopped if you could ban it? It's not like you're banning just one company. Anyone with the resources can still obtain and run the models. Sure, big models like Kimi K3 will be less accessible until a foreign version of Openrouter with no incentive to listen to US law begins offering it. Or they offer it and obfuscate what model it actually is behind codenames.

It wouldn't surprise me if that kind of problem is partially why weights are open. Because you can't meaningfully stomp them out completely.

Post reply on HN