Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries' • Hacker News Board

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#731

Post by kevindamm » Wed, Jul 09, 2025, 1:19 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #233

kevindamm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a petition with a startlingly high percentage of employees signing it, but no telling how many of them felt pressured to to keep their job.

They didn't need pressuring. There was enough money involved that was at risk without Sam that they did what they thought was the best way to protect their nest eggs.

That was actually the kind of pressure I was thinking of, not social/managerial pressure, though I think either could apply in that situation, depending on the individual.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#732

Post by neilv » Wed, Jul 09, 2025, 2:52 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #697

bigyabai wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He absolutely is. Again, refer to the nuclear bomb and the unconscionable capital that was invested as a result of early successes in nuclear tests. That was an actual weapon capable of killing millions of people in the blink of an eye. Countries raced to get one so fast that it was practically a nuclear Preakness Stakes for a few decades there. By collating AI as a doomsday weapon, you necessarily are begging govern…

> He absolutely is. When people explicitly say "do not build this, nobody should build this, under no circumstances build this, slow down and stop, nobody knows how to get this right yet", it's rather a stretch to assume they must mean the exact opposite, "oh, you should absolutely hurry be the first one to build this". > By collating AI as a doomsday weapon, you necessarily are begging governments to attain it befor…

Though there still is the problem of telling a child of an early level of cognitive development not to do something, which virtually guarantees that they will try to do it.

One of my favorite Tweets:

https://x.com/AlexBlechman/status/1457842724128833538

> Sci-Fi Author: In my book I invented the Torment Nexus as a cautionary tale

> Tech Company: At long last, we have created the Torment Nexus from classic sci-fi novel Don't Create The Torment Nexus

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#733

Post by Grimblewald » Sat, Jul 12, 2025, 10:44 AM UTC

_aavaa_ wrote: post #723

Grimblewald wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, but that being said, Llama is GPLv3 weather Meta likes it or not. Same as ChatGPT and all the others. ALL of them can perfectly reproduce GPLv3 licensed works and data, making them derivative work, and the license is quite clear on that matter. In fact up until recently you could get chatGPT to info dump all sorts of things with that argument, but now when you try you will hit a network error, and afterwards it…

I don't see how this follows at all. Github isn't GPL3 just because it stores and gives you back gpl3 code

read the license, and look up what derivative work means. If you're still unclear after that I'm happy to walk you through it.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#734

Post by Grimblewald » Sat, Jul 12, 2025, 10:49 AM UTC

Iolaum wrote: post #437

Grimblewald wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, but that being said, Llama is GPLv3 weather Meta likes it or not. Same as ChatGPT and all the others. ALL of them can perfectly reproduce GPLv3 licensed works and data, making them derivative work, and the license is quite clear on that matter. In fact up until recently you could get chatGPT to info dump all sorts of things with that argument, but now when you try you will hit a network error, and afterwards it…

This is interesting but it has not been proven in court, right?

related stuff has, the core part being that if your model reproduces parts or all of a licensed work, it needs to comply with the license / copyright. Otherwise why aren't pirates just making 'models' that generate protected material, or music, and completely bypass all laws?

I know because I wanted to, as a form of protest/performance art, train a model to a few Disney movies and publicly distribute, but legal advice was this would put me directly into hot water not just because of who im pissing off (which i knew and was comfortable with) but also the fact there was precedent (i.e. news papers suing LLM providers).

It would be an open and shut case that would leave me in financial ruin.

The reason openAI hasn't been struck with this yet is, who has the time? and there isn't much to learn from all that either. Most open source tooling out competes openAI's offering as is, so the community wouldn't really win beyond punishing someone.