4 ms·

OpenAI willing to bend the knee quite deep. If they want to do licensing and filtering and do that without fundamentally bricking the model, then by all means g

OpenAI willing to bend the knee quite deep. If they want to do licensing and filtering and do that without fundamentally bricking the model, then by all means go ahead.

ricardobayes 3y ago
This needs regulation before we end up creating another net negative piece of tech that we seem to have done in the past decade quite often.
mutatio 3y ago
It's not bending the knee, that's how they want it to be perceived, but what's really happening is that they're trying to pull up the ladder.
- reaperman 3y ago
  It'll be a temporary 10-year moat at best. Eventually consumer-grade hardware will be exaflop-scale.
  - digging 3y ago
    A 10-year moat in AI right now is not a minor issue.
  - classified 3y ago
    By then it will be legally locked down and copyrighted to hell and back.
    - reaperman 3y ago
      I'm sorry, what? - What is OpenAI's level of copyright now? - How is it going to be more "copyrighted" in the future? - How does this affect competitors differently in the future vs. the copyright that OpenAI has now?
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > What is OpenAI's level of copyright now Limited. They’re hoping to change that. It’s no secret that open-source models are the long-run competition to the likes of OpenAI.
        reaperman 3y ago
        I don't understand what "Limited" entails. I was pointedly asking for something a bit more specific.
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > don't understand what "Limited" entails Nobody does. It’s being litigated. They want it legislated. Model weights being proprietary by statute would close off the threat from “consumer-grade hardware” with “exaflop-scale.”
        reaperman 3y ago
        > "Nobody [knows what it means]" [re: knowing what 'limited' means] Then why did you say "Limited"? Surely YOU must have meant something by it when you said it. What did YOU mean? I don't think you're saying that you are repeating something someone else said, and you didn't think they knew what they meant by it, and you also don't know what you/they meant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming you had/have a meaning in mind. If you were just repeating something someone else said who didn't know what they meant by it, then please correct me and let me know -- because that's what "nobody knows what it means" implies, but I feel like you knew what you meant so I'm failing to connect something here. > It’s being litigated. I'm not able to find any ongoing suits involving OpenAI asserting copyright over anything. Can you point me to one? I only see some where OpenAI is trying to weaken any existing copyright protections, to their benefit. I must be missing something. I'm also unable to find any lobbyist / think-tank / press release talking points on establishing copyright protections for model weights. Where did you see this ongoing litigation?

OpenAI willing to bend the knee quite deep. If they want to do licensing and filtering and do that without fundamentally bricking the model, then by all means go ahead.

ricardobayes 3y ago

This needs regulation before we end up creating another net negative piece of tech that we seem to have done in the past decade quite often.

mutatio 3y ago

It's not bending the knee, that's how they want it to be perceived, but what's really happening is that they're trying to pull up the ladder.

reaperman 3y ago
It'll be a temporary 10-year moat at best. Eventually consumer-grade hardware will be exaflop-scale.
- digging 3y ago
  A 10-year moat in AI right now is not a minor issue.
- classified 3y ago
  By then it will be legally locked down and copyrighted to hell and back.
  - reaperman 3y ago
    I'm sorry, what? - What is OpenAI's level of copyright now? - How is it going to be more "copyrighted" in the future? - How does this affect competitors differently in the future vs. the copyright that OpenAI has now?
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > What is OpenAI's level of copyright now Limited. They’re hoping to change that. It’s no secret that open-source models are the long-run competition to the likes of OpenAI.
      - reaperman 3y ago
        I don't understand what "Limited" entails. I was pointedly asking for something a bit more specific.
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > don't understand what "Limited" entails Nobody does. It’s being litigated. They want it legislated. Model weights being proprietary by statute would close off the threat from “consumer-grade hardware” with “exaflop-scale.”
        reaperman 3y ago
        > "Nobody [knows what it means]" [re: knowing what 'limited' means] Then why did you say "Limited"? Surely YOU must have meant something by it when you said it. What did YOU mean? I don't think you're saying that you are repeating something someone else said, and you didn't think they knew what they meant by it, and you also don't know what you/they meant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming you had/have a meaning in mind. If you were just repeating something someone else said who didn't know what they meant by it, then please correct me and let me know -- because that's what "nobody knows what it means" implies, but I feel like you knew what you meant so I'm failing to connect something here. > It’s being litigated. I'm not able to find any ongoing suits involving OpenAI asserting copyright over anything. Can you point me to one? I only see some where OpenAI is trying to weaken any existing copyright protections, to their benefit. I must be missing something. I'm also unable to find any lobbyist / think-tank / press release talking points on establishing copyright protections for model weights. Where did you see this ongoing litigation?