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

U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#81

Post by greyface- »

wood_spirit wrote: post #71
SkitterKherpi wrote: post #62

So them banning Fable for only non-Americans is what we non-Americans should expect to be the norm going forward? Way to build even more resentment abroad. I'm very pro-west, but at this point okay, I guess the rest of us have to side with China, not because we remotely like it, but because they don't try to be quite so antagonistic to us in everything they do.

Expect the US to sanction non-US-controlled models and put sanctions on individuals, companies and countries that use them? They already do this with other things like oil.

Oil isn't made out of information and cannot be transmitted via a speech act.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#82

Post by bilekas »

15155 wrote: post #63
bilekas wrote: post #30

Wow.. Okay so it's official now that the playbook is "we will try to prevent anyone who we don't like to use advanced tech". I understand if its military hardware and software, that's the property of the US government however this is the property of a private company.. Now seemingly being commandeered and issued at the will of the government, sounds very Russian/Chinese to me. Is there a precedent for this before in…

The overwhelming majority of export-controlled items are made by private corporations: the US government itself makes exceedingly little in comparison. The missiles Raytheon makes are export-controlled too, and they're not somehow "property of the US government" - this isn't China. Is this just upsetting because it's a product you want to enjoy? > Is there a precedent for this before in a democratic country ? Try eve…

> Is this just upsetting because it's a product you want to enjoy?

No, infact I'm a proponent of open models and being able to run them locally, it just feels strange that a consumer product would be under the same restrictions as military grade equipment and tech which is specifically designed for warfare.

> Try every weapons system, encrypted radio system, FPGAs with high-bandwidth transceivers, lithography equipment, etc. etc. etc. There's plenty of precedent.

If it's the same equivalent then my issue is just that, it feels like trying to restrict the useage of RSA because it could be used by bad actors.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#84

Post by 217 »

sonink wrote: post #80

There is an assumption that everyone is making here - that China will not do the same. It is entirely possible, that China restricts their frontier models - as and when they are developed - to only Chinese citizens. And India follows along. IMO AI is different from everything else. It is a weapon as potent as nuclear. It is only natural that it be treated as one.

im crying bro snuck in india

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#85

Post by pjc50 »

watwut wrote: post #45
wewewedxfgdf wrote: post #34

Remember how China turned its tech industry into a smoking ruin - make making them all submit to political priorities: Ant Group: China halted Ant’s IPO and forced a restructuring Alibaba: China fined and politically disciplined Alibaba Didi: China punished Didi after its US listing by removing its apps, freezing users, forcing delisting Tutoring platforms: banned profit from core school-subject tutoring. Tencent gam…

China tech industry is smoking ruin? On what planet are you living?

I suppose we should bookmark this for the next time that HN claims that the rise of China's tech industry is inevitable.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#86

Post by rvba »

InsideOutSanta wrote: post #57
sscaryterry wrote: post #54

This will be the end of the US's short-lived AI supremacy. OpenAI and Anthropic are already wildly unprofitable, cutting off the world-wide income stream is just fucking bad business.

Don't worry, their pals in the government will bail them out. But it is odd that this administration has learned absolutely nothing about the mid- to long-term effects of export restrictions on other countries' ability to compete with the US.

Mid and long term effects will come with next administration - which can be blamed for the failure (even if it has nothing to do with it) -> so those who caused the problem can be voted back to power.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#87

Post by dminik »

krustyvonklown wrote: post #18
selcuka wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the world really has moved on to open models Don't get me wrong: I'm all for open models, but I think it will get more and more difficult to distil-train them without (legitimate) access to frontier models.

Personally, I find it rather humorous that we've moved from the fear that AI generated output would corrupt training to the idea that it is essential to training. Reality itself has not just a left bias but a bias to fundamentals. Bootstrap from fundamentals without introducing arbitrary error and you have the superior system; it just may not be highly compatible with a trash ecosystem.

I mean, I'm not sure that's the correct read on this.

If you want an Opus class model, it makes sense that you would train on what Opus outputs. But, if you want something better than Opus, training on the same data that Opus was trained on with the same architecture will only result in an Opus class model. Then, if your dataset also contains Opus outputs, many of which are wrong, then it makes sense that the model would have reduced performance.

All this to say that I don't think there's such a thing as a "Model Collapse," but there likely is a "Model Stagnation."

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#88

Post by 15155 »

bilekas wrote: post #82
15155 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The overwhelming majority of export-controlled items are made by private corporations: the US government itself makes exceedingly little in comparison. The missiles Raytheon makes are export-controlled too, and they're not somehow "property of the US government" - this isn't China. Is this just upsetting because it's a product you want to enjoy? > Is there a precedent for this before in a democratic country ? Try eve…

> Is this just upsetting because it's a product you want to enjoy? No, infact I'm a proponent of open models and being able to run them locally, it just feels strange that a consumer product would be under the same restrictions as military grade equipment and tech which is specifically designed for warfare. > Try every weapons system, encrypted radio system, FPGAs with high-bandwidth transceivers, lithography equipme…

> If it's the same equivalent then my issue is just that, it feels like trying to restrict the useage of RSA because it could be used by bad actors.

RSA was practically impossible to control (an implementation is what, 100 lines in any language?) and the global benefits outweighed the cost and futility associated with restrictions.

AI laboratories with hundreds of billions of dollars in funding aren't cropping up in every country in the world, and their products and services are easily controlled and not easily replicated.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#89

Post by FinnLobsien »

testfrequency wrote: post #79
FinnLobsien wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s pretty clear why they’re abiding by this: -the US is the only place where you can raise the kinds of money you need to run a lab like this. -a government that won’t let you sell products to customers abroad will probably object even more to you moving abroad. Even if you made the move abroad, that government might no longer let you access US data centers. -This basically affects OpenAI and Anthropic, whi…

The elephant in the room is that the US AI firms should not be as valuable as they are. They should not require the sort of capital they are seeking, the amount of employees, the amount of offices and resources..but they are so steeped in investor interests - why stop being fed? Many Americans want AI to fail. The US gov wants to control AI. The AI companies are running out of things to do, and are shipping product a…

Whether they’re over-valued and over-resourced is a big question. I think that will be answered when eventual price hikes happen and people shift which AI they use and/or what they use it for.

We’re still in the “5$ airport Ubers thanks to VC money” era of AI

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#90

Post by yorwba »

wewewedxfgdf wrote: post #69
watwut wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China tech industry is smoking ruin? On what planet are you living?

Tech crackdowns rid China of entrepreneurial capitalism https://eastasiaforum.org/2023/09/12/tech-crackdowns-rid-chi... Why China crushed its tech giants https://www.wired.com/story/china-tech-giants-policy/ Why Big Tech May Never Recover in China https://time.com/6973119/china-big-tech-crackdown-backfiring... Beijing can’t afford another crackdown on its tech companies https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/11/china-cant-affo…

That is about investor confidence, not company performance. The companies are for the most part still making boatloads of money, just not as much as investors naively expected to get from taking over a market with 1.4B people.

And even if foreign investors are more cautious now, there is plenty of money trapped by capital controls, so that it doesn't look like new tech companies have trouble raising capital anyway.

Post reply on HN