• Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Young companies innovate. Old companies litigate

    If you have to lobby the government to protect your company from smaller competition then your business model sucks.

    I suspect, however, that they’re not going to be able to just stop Chinese offerings from being downloaded and run locally. And that is going to do most of the stuff for which people are turning to AI.

    • eicker@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Exactly. It’s much easier to regulate an API than software people can download and run on their own hardware. Once Since capable open weight AI models exist, they spread much like Linux or other open source software: mirrors appear, forks emerge, and improvements compound. Governments can make access less convenient, but preventing global distribution altogether is a far harder problem than restricting a hosted service.

  • RabbitBBQ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    They have also been claiming Chinese models are stealing their work and intellectual property by distilling the frontier models. Which is ironic considering they stole the works of all of humanity to create it in the first place.

  • melfie@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    16 hours ago

    “OpenAI” signed the open weight pledge, which only makes sense given the company name and original values. They’ve had gpt-oss for quite a while, but it feels like a pretty half-assed effort for the purposes of virtue signaling. I’m not holding my breath for them to release an open weight model on par with GLM, Kimi, or Qwen.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 hours ago

      They’ve abandoned their openness ever since they saw the widespread success of ChatGPT and GPT3. They were really only "Open"AI around the GPT-GPT2 era.

  • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Funnily enough, OpenAI signed the open weights letter too.

    Sam Altman would do literally anything, say anything to make OpenAI look good. He would sacrifice his grandmother if he could, and I’m not one to say that lightly.

  • JTode@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Never has it been more clear what Capitalism is. It has fuckall to do with freedom and everything to do with sharecropping.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      According to Karl Marx, this is what capitalism becomes. Eventually, the ownership class captures government and turns regulation to benefit the companies that capture it, and those companies outside that loop cannot compete and die off.

      And then it gets to where one player owns all the properties and the other players are going bankrupt one by one.

      But US history shows us the capitalist will exploit labor by any means they can, ultimately pushing them into bonded servitude. (We don’t like to call it slavery, but it’s slavery.)

    • terabyterex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      it has nothing to do with either. its about private ownership. thats it. thats all it has ever been and thinking the government owning companies is better is silly.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        The government owning companies is better as shown by the countless examples of product and service degradation and inflation following privatization campaigns in the UK, Canada and elsewhere.

    • ExFed@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      The current economic regime is less like “capitalism” and more like “feudalism with corporations.”

      • JTode@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 hours ago

        That depends on what you are calling Capitalism. I’m all for free markets and such, but Capitalism was never anti-feudal - first thing the Burghers did was marry their kids into Noble families. It was strictly about adding “man with enough money that he doesn’t work” to the protected class.

  • _Nemo_@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    24 hours ago

    “Using free Chinese models that you can run locally and offline is a security risk. People and businesses high on AI should be forced to use our expensive cloud-based models that funnel all their data through our servers and can be turned off or price-hiked by us at any moment!”

    • terabyterex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      this article doesnt address local models. this is about kimmi k3. i had to look because its very hard to restrict local ran software

      • baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 hours ago

        kimi k3 is going to release on huggingface tomorrow. it will be open weight, assuming nothing gets between now and then. they just wanted a short exclusivity period.

      • partofthevoice@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        Trade secrets, too. Frontier providers have everything they need to help you, take what worked, then help your competitors.

    • zwerg@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      24 hours ago

      I get what you are saying, but its not just data egress, its how the model was trained. I’m thinking of models trained to inject security weaknesses, for example.

      • ApeNo1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I see no reason US based AI companies would not carry the same risk especially with the well documented cases of groups like the NSA openly asking US technology companies to provide back doors.

        • zwerg@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          20 hours ago

          For sure, that’s why I dont trust any of them. Its interesting because unlike open source, open weight models don’t tell you anything about what was included or excluded.

      • 4am@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Yes, rather we trust the capitalists who want to literally remove technology from our control and force us to use their cloud and their AI models that are built on good old American ingenuity and honesty, trust me bro you’re better off looking for weaknesses in our models by spending on tokens to see what happens .

        Not everything China does is a psyop.

    • eicker@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      That’s not necessary: as the Open Weight AI models from the US are rather poor, nobody wants them anyway. 🤷

              • Rioting Pacifist@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                You’re in a desert, walking along in the sand, when all of a sudden you look down and see a tortoise. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can’t. Not without your help. But you’re not helping.

                you’re not helping! Why is that?

  • eicker@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    1 day ago

    Using security as a convenient tool to sideline foreign competition is a slippery slope, especially from companies that built their own success on open research.

      • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Untill you want to protect consumers from something capitalists are doing. Then it’s all about not limiting innovation. In reality , innovation translates into additional fees, subscriptions, dynamic pricing and that kind of stuff.

      • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        In a competitive market, there’d no longer be a US auto industry, except Tesla, and it wouldn’t survive much longer without massive subsidies.

      • eicker@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Perhaps. The difference with regard to OWAI, however, is that US companies have no alternatives to Chinese suppliers.

  • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    24 hours ago

    “Think of the children!!”

    Just turn the internet tube from china-ai off, how can it be that hard?!!