Live data from Hacker News

Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

9to5mac.com

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#851
post #624

Quick reminder that Apple was part of the silicon valley crew that partook of illegal non-poaching arrangements with other SV companies, helping to stifle salaries and more. But, that's a bit of a tangent. On the other hand, Apple is accused of (and a jury ruled against them on the issue) hiring from Masimo to steal trade secret. Appeals are pending, of course, but it's a reminder that Apple is not lily white on this…

Yeah I cannot feel any sympathy for either companies here. They all do this exact thing, including Apple. OpenAI was just the last one to get caught. And if OpenAI uses this hardware information to bring less locked hardware to the masses, wishful thinking I know, then more power to them. If AI keeps improving, it is very important to make sure everyone gets at least a smidge of a chance of equal access to AI otherwi…

This is silly. Iirc there is a big dif between poaching people for ip and telling people to lie keep working download and physically steal ip.

Open ai is not a hero. Open ai is the kind of intellectual property theft and i hope the entire thing crashes and burns. There are plenty of other companies out there less disgusting that can work on foundation models

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#852
post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people are in it for the challenge. Someone else's outage? Yeah I'll happily help diagnose it, analysing and figuring out where the issue is can teach you a lot of things. For the record, this was never at night. Late in the evening, sure.

Also sometimes (depending on the company) being seen to visibly chip in fighting fires can win you real credibility that you can put in the bank and then use later when you want to slightly slack off for a bit. So it can actually make logical sense to do it occasionally even from a purely selfish perspective if it's half an hour on a random Tuesday evening and you aren't actually doing anything else important. All de…

Keep your ops people happy. Help them when you can, it's the fairest way i would say to not have to be on call. It also makes them feel like they're not on their own. You're all on the same team.

Not sure if upper management sees this stuff. For the number of times I've fixed other people's crap (or found the root cause, so they can just fix it) I don't think I got any recognition for that.

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#853

Until the industry addresses the Original Sin of Generative AI (and the ascendance of Thievery Corporations), we should expect more and more of this. So far, theft has been rewarded. As long as you make enough money, people seem to be okay with ignoring long-lasting impacts of intellectual theft. As long as you become King of the Cannibals, it seems many are happy to remember you as King and not as the Cannibal.

IP infringement is not theft . There’s a whole “you wouldn’t download a car” meme about this. Intellectual property has always been a made up idea that has been abused for years by big companies far in excess of its societal value. I’m not sad that the force of IP restrictions seems to be weakening, but I am surprised to see so many people in tech that previously were pretty lassez faire on IP to suddenly take it so…

The “tech worker” of today is nothing like the SF based hackers and early product designers of Web 2.0, twitter era.

Artists in their own right and yet fundamentally pirates who opened the browser ecosystem, pioneered open APIs, invented ad blocking, embraced open source, engineered browser based telephony and streaming, gave us modern services like PopcornTime carrying the torch from torrents/piratebay into the modern era.

Give me Photoshop and JavaScript and I care not who makes the laws.

Today we have charlatans, hackademics, and heavily moderated sites like HN. The tech industry is nothing like it used to be - if anything it’s inverted with all the corporate replicas in every role and the creatives kicked out. There is no rebellion even slightly, no originality - they sound like hens, predictable and unprofound in every way.

The real creative hacker type needs a new vertical, this one has been taken over like ants on a sandwich.

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#854

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that doesn’t mean they actually had any legal responsibility to lock him out If the property owner doesn’t make bare minimum effort to protect the property Then how much effort and money should taxpayer spend to protect and prosecute regarding the same property? It seems strange to imply that people that own nothing must through their taxes pay for protection of property of the people who do own everything.

Crimes are crimes and must be prosecuted as such. The phrase for what you’re doing is “victim blaming”. I don’t know what triggers some people to think this way other than a deep desire to find a contrarian take on a situation. But no, when a person commits a crime the responsibility and accountability for committing that crime is entirely on the person who committed the crime. If you start blaming the victim or down…

> Crimes are crimes and must be prosecuted as such.

That would be nice but that is not the current situation, neither my stolen bicycle nor the fraud that caused 2008 had resulted in any arrests. Until such time that all crimes are crimes, it is a valid question.

> by the numbers the wealthy and corporations pay significantly more in taxes than the “people who own nothing”

This statement is highly misleading in three different dimensions:

Firstly, both in UK and in USA individuals pay like 5x more in income tax than corporations pay in tax. So people pay more tax and yet prosecutions against corporations are less than 1% of all prosecutions, that seems questionable.

Secondly, what is the statistics you are citing is actually saying? "Out of the people that declare income to government, those that declare the most income, pay the most tax". That's a bit self-evident, isn't it?

It does not address the claim that wealthiest people don't declare taxable income, and therefore pay little tax.

Thirdly, the measurement needs to be relative, not absolute. The claim "I pay less income tax than Facebook does' is true, but Facebook pays the effective tax rate of about 3%.

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#855

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm unwilling to speculate whether or not OpenAI is breaking their agreements (I honestly have no clue), but as an NLP researcher I'm certain they could launder data by having an LLM rewrite it and subsequently train on the rewritten data. Papers like "Curated Synthetic Data Doesn't Have to Collapse" [1] and "How to Synthesize Text Data without Model Collapse?" [2] demonstrate it's possible to do this. Since OpenAI's…

It's exactly what you've said. I'm speaking about Anthropic though, I have no idea whether OpenAI does it. > Anthropic agrees that Customer (a) retains all rights to its Inputs, and (b) owns its Outputs. Anthropic disclaims any rights it receives to the Customer Content under these Terms. Subject to Customer’s compliance with these Terms, Anthropic hereby assigns to Customer its right, title and interest (if any) in…

Just to be clear, you’re speculating, right? They could also not be doing this.

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#856
post #648
post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the only reason you didn't behave that way to begin with is that you lack the money and power to evade the consequences, then yes. You really are that person.

while i somewhat agree with that reasoning, it can go too far - most people would murder and kill if there weren't any consequences to doing so. But is it right to say who they really are as being murderers?

> most people would murder and kill if there weren't any consequences to doing so

Citation needed. There are a lot of ways I can improve as a person, but I can promise you I am not and not ever been a murderer or killer regardless of consequences. Even if someone threatened me or someone else, I would do my best to not kill them and simply diffuse the situation.

Maybe take some time to reflect.

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#857
post #765
post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) This is a legit point although i don't see Valve as a big problem in that area. They invented lootboxes but refused to be as bad as others who followed them. Today with valve these things are restricted purely to cosmetics. 2) is weak. The 30% rate was set in 2003 when Steam had zero market power and was identical to the rate used by Apple, PlayStation, Xbox, and Nintendo. Valve later added tiered reductions (25%…

The reason the 30% rate is sustained though IS the abuse of market power with the PMFN clause, which ensures that competitors cannot price lower. Everything else is an attempt to stay the primary shopfront. Sure you can sell your game and give away steam keys - but you can't sell it for a lower price than on Steam, and we still want you to encourage your users to come to steam and buy things. We will give you free ma…

> The reason the 30% rate is sustained though IS the abuse of market power with the PMFN clause, which ensures that competitors cannot price lower.

Steam's official price parity policy applies only to Steam Keys, which are free to generate and cost Valve nothing. The actual written rule, from the Steamworks documentation, says: "It is important that you don't give Steam customers a worse deal than Steam Key purchasers." It even allows discounts at different times on other stores, as long as Steam gets a comparable offer within a reasonable period. There is no written policy preventing a developer from selling a separate, non-Steam-key version of their game cheaper elsewhere. The claim that Valve informally enforces broader price parity beyond Steam Keys is the unproven allegation at the center of the lawsuit.

And the broader claim, that lower commissions would lead to cheaper games for consumers, has already been tested and disproven. Epic exclusives like Borderlands 3, Control, Metro Exodus, Phoenix Point, and The Division 2 launched with no Steam version at all, complete pricing freedom, and a 12% commission. They were all priced at full retail. The hypothetical £35 game you describe has been possible for almost a decade. Nobody has produced it because developers and publishers set prices, and they choose to maximize their own margin regardless of what the platform takes.

> We will give you free matchmaking - just not for players who have bought on another platform, so if players buy on another platform they can't play with their friends.

Steamworks matchmaking requires a Steam account and Steam does not force developers to use Steamworks. This is how every platform-specific networking layer works: Xbox Live requires an Xbox account, PlayStation Network requires a PSN account. They offer a free matchmaking service if you want other platforms use other platforms. But i guess it is because of:

> Everything else is an attempt to stay the primary shopfront.

Yeah this sounds a lot like:"How dare they deliver a better service in the pursuit of user retention."

> taking payments, serving games, having refunds(!) and adding a chat panel isn't big and complicated in 2026

This lists surface features and ignores the infrastructure: global CDN serving petabytes of downloads, payment processing across dozens of regional payment methods, fraud prevention, Workshop mod hosting, cloud saves, anti-cheat, regional pricing tooling, Proton development, Steam Deck compatibility, discovery algorithms. But the real test is simpler: developers are not forced to use Steam. If the value were as thin as claimed, the lower-priced competitors would be winning. They are not.

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#858

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so.. He’s being sued personally as well. the lawsuit is Apple vs. “ CHANG LIU, TANG YEW TAN, OPENAI FOUNDATION f/k/a OPENAI, INC., OPENAI GROUP PBC, and IO PRODUCTS, LLC f/k/a IO PRODUCTS, INC.”

It's a crime too. If the Feds take an interest he could get ten years. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1832

[dead]

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#859
post #791

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yike, this notion is deeply troubling to think about

I think by now we have enough evidence to support that point of view. Not everybody up top is a crook, but not having morals or abandoning them along the way certainly makes it easier to ascend.

This is simply the new "Poor people are evil" which was popular for some time.

When these kind of generalizations sound like they are flattening any resemblance of reality, it is because they are

Re: Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets

#860
post #259
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's Apple, which is a huge target. Never mind these individuals, you will have China, Russia and other seeking to infiltrate it. In any top r&d area, one wonders if they perhaps should be searching staff on way out and making then sign out and return CAD drawings etc.

You get trustworthy people by trusting people. Generally when I was there there was a presumption of trust. Given how blatantly the defendants are alleged to have acted, that’s still the case.

> Generally when I was there there was a presumption of trust.

The reality is, there has to be. And, if you can't trust someone then don't work with them.

I was talking to an amazing lawyer/business person I know one day and I asked about writing 'air tight' contracts which would never put you in a position to be screwed. He said something along the lines of, that's impossible. Someone could take you to court and you could still lose even if you think the contract is perfect. What he said next stuck with me over the rest of my career, 'if you truly can't trust someone, no contract will be fool-proof. The solution is simply to not work with or do business with them.'

Post reply on HN