Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
1–10 of 72 posts
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#2Doesn’t look like fraud but likely lower the valuation unless they can overcome the ip issue
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#3I don't remember Stability claiming in any public forum that they solely developed Stable Diffusion. In fact the first stable diffusion model on Hugging Face is under CompVis Org.
They had an issue with Runway with a model takedown or something but I think that was sorted out later on.
I don't know why the article seems desparately trying to show Stability in bad light while they have in fact funded a lot of AI model development and helped release it with permissive licence
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#4I think in the world of ML, contributing that much compute should count as co-creation. There is a lot of code published by academia that just needs compute and data, but they don't receive it. Stability deserves credit for Doing the Thing. IP rights are another thing but that's a whole subtree of legal questions that society is barreling towards.
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#5[deleted]
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#6[deleted]
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#7I don't remember Stability claiming in any public forum that they solely developed Stable Diffusion. In fact the first stable diffusion model on Hugging Face is under CompVis Org. They had an issue with Runway with a model takedown or something but I think that was sorted out later on. I don't know why the article seems desparately trying to show Stability in bad light while they have in fact funded a lot of AI model…
> I don't remember Stability claiming in any public forum that they solely developed Stable Diffusion
This article makes no such claim. It is about whether or not investors knew.
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#8Lying and fraud aren’t ok, and founders should be held to account for that.
But this doesn’t seem like that. It seems like any disappointed investors just didn’t do the bare minimum you’d expect with an investment of $100m.
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#9I think in the world of ML, contributing that much compute should count as co-creation. There is a lot of code published by academia that just needs compute and data, but they don't receive it. Stability deserves credit for Doing the Thing. IP rights are another thing but that's a whole subtree of legal questions that society is barreling towards.
> IP rights are another thing
Actually the _only_ thing in contention per the article.
Re: Leaked deck raises questions over Stability AI’s Series A pitch to investors
#10Someone help me understand this… the code is open source, so does this mean it’s actually proprietary and we can’t use it?
And if it is indeed open source with a completely permissive license, then what material difference does it make who originally developed it?