4 ms·
You can't copyright AI generated works. OpenAI are barking up the wrong tree.
by dkjaudyeqooe 2y ago
You can't copyright AI generated works. OpenAI are barking up the wrong tree.
- washadjeffmad 2y agoThey're not making a legal claim, they're trying to establish provenance over Deepseek in the public eye.
- __loam 2y agoIf this is their goal, R1 is on par with the $200 a month model. Most people don't give a shit.
- Dalewyn 2y ago>Most people don't give a shit. I think it's more accurate to say most people can't (and don't) care about big monetary figures. As far as Joe Average is concerned, ChatGPT cost $OoomphaDuuumpha and Deepseek cost $RuuunphaBuuunpha. The only thing Joe Average will care is the bill he gets after using it himself.
- __loam 2y agoThat's what I mean, Joe average is going to go with free over $2400 a year.
- xsmasher 2y agoYes; and trying to justify their own valuation by pointing out that Deepseek cost more than advertised to create if you count in the cost of creating OpenAI's model.
- actsasbuffoon 2y agoThough I also think it’s extremely bad for OpenAI’s valuation. If you give me $500B to train the best model in the world, and then a couple people at a hedge fund in China can use my API to train a model that’s almost equal for a tiny fraction of what I paid, then it appears to be outrageously foolish to build new frontier models. The only financial move that makes sense is to wait for someone else to burn hundreds of billions building a better model, and then clone it. OpenAI primarily exists to do one of the most foolish things you can possibly do with money. Seems like a really bad deal for investors.
- satellite2 2y agoLike going to the Moon.
- joquarky 2y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-mover_advantage#Second-mover_advantage https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-mover_advantage#Second...
- vkou 2y agoFortunately everyone who gave OpenAI money did it to further their stated mission of bettering humanity, and not for the chance at any financial gain.
- thayne 2y agoI am very doubtful that is why MS gave them so much.
- sodality2 2y agoI suspect (and hope) that this is a satirization of the claims about OpenAI's nonprofit goals and complicated legal structure
- chongli 2y agoAt one time they were nonprofit by choice. Now they are nonprofit not by choice.
- unclebucknasty 2y agoIndeed those donors must be elated.
- SecretDreams 2y agoAs it turns out, first to market only matters if you can actually make a novel moat. Which OpenAi has presently got no chance to do.
- addicted 2y agoIt still doesn’t justify their valuation because it shows that their product is unprotectable. In fact, I’d argue this is even worse, because no matter how much OpenAI improves their product, and Altman is prancing around claiming to need $7Trillion to improve their product, someone else can replicate it for a few million.
- CamperBob2 2y agoIt still doesn’t justify their valuation because it shows that their product is unprotectable. First-mover advantage doesn't always have to pay off in the marketplace. FedEx probably has to schedule extra flights between SF and DC just to haul all of OpenAI's patent applications. I suspect that it's going to end up like the early days of radio, when everybody had to license dozens of key patents from RCA ( https://reason.com/2020/08/05/how-the-government-created-rca/ https://reason.com/2020/08/05/how-the-government-created-rca... ). For the same reason, Microsoft is reputed to make more money from Android licenses than Google does.
- thelittleone 2y agoThose patents wont do much to protect them from competitors abroad.
- mbesto 2y agoIf that's the case, then nearly every software company should be counting the cost of Linus Torvalds development.
- pempem 2y agoIs it predictable that they would seek to establish provenance, sure. Is it our job as a thinking public to decry it? Also sure. In fact, wildly yes.
- SecretDreams 2y agoThe public gives no shit about any of these companies. There are no moats or loyalties in this space. Just individuals and corporations looking for the cheapest tool possible that gets the job close to done. OpenAi spent investor money to enable random Chinese Ai startups to offer a better version of their own product at a fraction of the cost. In some ways, this was inevitable to be the conclusion, but I do find the way we arrive at this conclusion to be particularly enjoyable to watch playout.
- pclmulqdq 2y agoThey use their terms of service as both a sword and a shield here. It's a little bit ridiculous.