4 ms·

>so hostile to someone who hacked something together. It's not hostile but I'm a bit tired of all those projects that sprout around AI. If it was an open-sour

>so hostile to someone who hacked something together. It's not hostile but I'm a bit tired of all those projects that sprout around AI. If it was an open-source project full of bugs, I would understand, and encourage and give solutions to the creator of the project, maybe even create tickets or fix bugs. But with AI, we are flooded with tons of closed-source frontends to a closed-source backend, and those projects are more than buggy since they confidently give bad solutions. It's not like a "DIY electric car project," it's someone putting pieces of cardboard on a Tesla and pretending it makes it safer or faster. I'm dumbfounded and I don't know how I am supposed to react to this, I would certainly not release that to anyone since it's antithetical to what I do and believe what software should be.

safety1st 4y ago
Good point. I wish OpenAI released more of their work as open source. I wish people building on top of them did too. That said, I usually won't begrudge a small-time developer or entrepreneur from choosing whatever licensing model they think is going to make them the most money. An army of small-time entrepreneurs who build closed source can still have democratizing effects on a market that's been captured by a few large companies. I'm more frustrated when I see big, entrenched companies finding ways to capture value from the open source ecosystem and privatize it. My view on v1s, prototypes and PoCs regardless of their licensing is that by design they're going to be a mess and have errors, if they don't you waited too long to ship. Maybe these folks should have been a little more honest in their marketing but man if we're going to get into a list of the offenders on that front I think they are way way down on that list. Overall in my view LLMs are the most disruptive thing to come along since the Web itself. Business model's like Google's are facing a direct challenge from this technology. Why do I want to look at Google's first page full of shitty search ads when I can use a LLM to get an answer immediately? As far as I'm concerned at this stage I would love to see a billion projects from every corner of the world built on top of this technology. Whether they're great or they're crap, the avalanche is the first real opportunity in many years to disrupt some giants.

safety1st 4y ago

Good point. I wish OpenAI released more of their work as open source. I wish people building on top of them did too. That said, I usually won't begrudge a small-time developer or entrepreneur from choosing whatever licensing model they think is going to make them the most money. An army of small-time entrepreneurs who build closed source can still have democratizing effects on a market that's been captured by a few large companies. I'm more frustrated when I see big, entrenched companies finding ways to capture value from the open source ecosystem and privatize it. My view on v1s, prototypes and PoCs regardless of their licensing is that by design they're going to be a mess and have errors, if they don't you waited too long to ship. Maybe these folks should have been a little more honest in their marketing but man if we're going to get into a list of the offenders on that front I think they are way way down on that list. Overall in my view LLMs are the most disruptive thing to come along since the Web itself. Business model's like Google's are facing a direct challenge from this technology. Why do I want to look at Google's first page full of shitty search ads when I can use a LLM to get an answer immediately? As far as I'm concerned at this stage I would love to see a billion projects from every corner of the world built on top of this technology. Whether they're great or they're crap, the avalanche is the first real opportunity in many years to disrupt some giants.