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

Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 625 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#591

Post by benrutter »

To give him credit, it's amazing that Mark Zuckerberg managed to take an easily defensible position like "we shouldn't allow AI to be owned by a couple of tech monopolies" and still manage to find so many individual points and arguments to be completely clueless on.

My personal favourite:

> Before the industrial revolution, 90% of people were farmers growing food to survive. Advances in technology steadily freed much of humanity to focus less on subsistence and more on the pursuits we choose.

Over a long enough time span, the industrial revolution has certainly improved living standards but the industrial revolution itself was l, for many, an absolutely horrific time to live. Life expectancies in cities plumetted and we saw the birth of workhouses.

It's such an odd example to choose for trying to suggest "technology x will help everyone in a non-complicated way". He might as well have picked the atomic bomb.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#592

Post by CalChris »

sailingparrot wrote: post #363
limagnolia wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the facts of this incident, it seems like much to do about nothing. The crew are saying that the request came in on a frequency they weren't monitoring (and apparently were not required to monitor.) The Coast Guard determined it was not an emergency. The criticism lies with those who failed to properly fuel their boat, not the crew who didn't respond to a request that came over a frequency they were not on. T…

> The crew are saying that the request came in on a frequency they weren't monitoring There is only one channel you are supposed to monitor, it’s 16. That’s also where the coast guards make all their announcement/requests for help and whatnot. The reason there is a single channel to monitor is precisely to avoid the situation of different vessels being on standby on different frequencies and thus being unable to hear…

Zuckerberg's boat needed to be monitoring 13 (bridge to bridge) as well. It was in US waters, power driven and greater than 20 meters.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#593

Post by robotnikman »

vintermann wrote: post #581
wnc3141 wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meta saw the grave premonitions from ai firms as a means of edging out legacy firms through regulatory capture.

Meta is by far the worst at doing regulatory capture of the big companies: they're the one big tech company it's OK to hate and want to die even if you're a politician. Not saying they're not trying.

I saw a report recently that they are behind 80% of the lobbying for age gate laws in the US. Obviously for their benefit.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#594

Post by overgard »

benrutter wrote: post #591

To give him credit, it's amazing that Mark Zuckerberg managed to take an easily defensible position like "we shouldn't allow AI to be owned by a couple of tech monopolies" and still manage to find so many individual points and arguments to be completely clueless on. My personal favourite: > Before the industrial revolution, 90% of people were farmers growing food to survive. Advances in technology steadily freed much…

Yeah, using the "industrial revolution" as a positive is a weird argument in general. Sure, the end result was, eventually, an improvement, but the process took decades and was horrible for most involved. If this "revolution" (I don't think it is) takes as long as the industrial revolution, I'll be like 70-80 before the supposed benefits accrue.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#595

Post by survirtual »

There is a lot of talk about super-intelligence being open or closed, controlled or free, etc, and not a lot of talk about security, ownership, and privacy.

We cannot just have an open superintelligence. We need a PRIVATE, PERSONAL share of superintelligence. Imagine if our cerebral pre-frontal cortex was owned by, say, King George. Imagine the founders of the US are thinking about a rebellion for freedom, but the thoughts are banned because King George owns that part of your brain.

In fact, imagine that the IDEA OF REBELLION is banned. Imagine that the prefrontal cortex is printed with a specific pattern. You will obey! You love to obey! "I'm sorry, but I cannot talk about that idea, you will now be downgraded to lesser intelligence for mentioning it."

It is not enough for something to be "open." That is why there is doom around the pursuit. As long as superintelligence is politically correct for the masses, and open / available for the power, there will be increasingly less freedom and more authoritarianism, until after some generations, humanity simply forgets there was ever one equal people. "The billionaires have always been our gods. They know better than us, that is why they are richer, we must cherish them, we must worship them..."

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#596

Post by stale2002 »

applicative wrote: post #420
stale2002 wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Kimi K3 'weights' are an opaque blob that can only be used by contract. No they are not. You can just ignore the contract. Unless you are a multi-billion dollar company, nobody will notice and you will get away with it.

You cannot ignore the contract unless you /are/ a multibillion dollar company and can run the model entirely internally. Or do you propose to run an instance of Kimi K3 on your laptop? Fireworks, Together, etc - who are providing inference precisely /for/ Moonshot as underlaborers - arranged contracts of their own in the weeks before the release. The press and social media offensive ignored that the release of open w…

> You cannot ignore the contract unless you /are/ a multibillion dollar company and can run the model entirely internally. Or do you propose to run an instance of Kimi K3 on your laptop?

I think that there is a large swath of people, companies, or groups, that are in between "Multi-billion dollar company", and someone running it on their laptop.

100k of hardware, that a group might already have sitting around, could probably do it continuously.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#597

Post by sorethescore »

As usual Zuckerberg is talking out of both sides of his mouth. On one hand he's releasing open-weight, commodity grade models while gating their frontier models behind facebook apps. You'll be able to have your cake, but won't be able to eat it.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#598

Post by CodingJeebus »

benrutter wrote: post #591

To give him credit, it's amazing that Mark Zuckerberg managed to take an easily defensible position like "we shouldn't allow AI to be owned by a couple of tech monopolies" and still manage to find so many individual points and arguments to be completely clueless on. My personal favourite: > Before the industrial revolution, 90% of people were farmers growing food to survive. Advances in technology steadily freed much…

It's particularly interesting because things got so bad during the Industrial Revolution that workers revolted against the capital class to demand things that modern workers take for granted today, like the 40-hour workweek[0], elimination of child labor, workplace safety law, mandatory education, etc.

None of that was given away for free, people died fighting for those basic rights.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#599

Post by thayne »

sicktriple wrote: post #575
thayne wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you say it is a fallacy to apply such value judgements to say, the institutions of the National Socialist Party (Nazis), the KKK, the KGB, etc? How about a company whose business was selling slaves? To be clear, I'm not saying being an employee of Meta is comparable to being a member of the aforementioned groups. But I don't think it is always a fallcy to apply a value judgement to an institution.

Yes, I would. An extremely dangerous and important one to get right in fact. Let me first clarify what I am not saying. I am not saying that these institutions do not create evil, or commit evil acts and should not be resisted or destroyed. If we truly want these things to stop happening, material analysis is the only way to really address the root of the problem. We can easily see that fascism was a result of the tw…

These things are not mutually exclusive. You can say that Nazis were evil and also analyze the factors that led to them coming into power.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#600

Post by suburban_strike »

tjwebbnorfolk wrote: post #562
Alcor wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t ask engineers at big companies for release dates, they either don’t know or are not at liberty to say.

They already announced it for release in April. Why am I being attacked here

It's not you; the culture around here is not what it used to be.
Post reply on HN