6 ms·
Google, Microsoft and xAI agree to share early AI models with U.S.
- bonsai_spool 6mo ago(OpenAI and Anthropic reached a similar agreement with the US in 2024, per the article)
- titzer 6mo agoRoutine corporatism and fascism is shameless to the point of being ho-hum these days. When the president has his own cryptocurrency and the federal government buys stock in this and that company for "strategic reasons", you're looking at a dystopia.
- maxdo 6mo ago[flagged]
- saidnooneever 6mo agowell it did mention the U.S. runs away quickly
- ceejayoz 6mo agoHow is it not related to the subject?
- jauntywundrkind 6mo agoThis is a strong thread that's needs to be plucked on again and again and again. Cory Doctorow had an excellent thread yesterday that touches on this: > You could be forgiven for assuming that this is just about reining in Wall Street greed, but that it isn't an especially political maneuver. That's not true: antitrust is the most consequentially political regulation (with the possible exception of regulations on elections). Every fascist power defeated in WWII relied on the backing of their national monopolists to take, hold and wield power. That's why the Marshall Plan technocrats who rewrote the laws of Europe, South Korea and Japan made sure to copy over US antitrust law onto those statute-books. The well moneyed interests are getting everything they want, for the faintest little bribe. For showing the obsequiousness, for showing fealty to the regime. The monopolization of power, allowing markets to en taken over by worse and worse foes of democracy, needs to be stopped. Needs to have some limit. The post talks about how: > Under the Correcting Lapsed Enforcement in Antitrust Norms for Mergers (CLEAN Mergers) Act, any company that was acquired in a deal worth $10b or more will have to break up with its merger partner if it turns out that these mergers were "politically influenced." https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net/post/3mkukzcwobv2h https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net/post/3mkuk...
- goosejuice 6mo agoI suspect the accelerationists, who appear more fascist aligned, are the ones upset by this. They go so far as considering regulation a form of murder. This is probably seen as a win for the Bostrom crowd and the more sane people in the middle. The issues to tackle are incompetence and corruption and that has little to do with AI.
- trjordan 6mo agoColor me unsurprised. Anthropic ran a weeks-long roadshow on how powerful Mythos is. They pointed to the danger, their controls, the capabilities, and practically begged the world to be scared of it. Simultaneously, the current US regime realized there was a way to demand fealty from the AI labs. If they're so dangerous, don't we need to see them first? That will cost you, obviously. Standard extortion from the government, at this moment in time. The labs get their marketing; the white house gets its pseudo-bribe. I hope nobody involved is confused about how we ended up here.
- colechristensen 6mo agoYeah, I saw several instances of important folks taking the Anthropic promotional campaign too seriously and this is what they got in return. I'd say internally people are cursing whoever's idea that was because clearly scaring people backfired.
- stonogo 6mo agoI would wager they're cheering, because this builds the moat they don't otherwise have. Want to do business in America? Get government-approved. Can't afford the regulatory fees, or your government won't let you submit to foreign programs? Good luck!
- deltoidmaximus 6mo agoYes, this has been a steady play from the start. From the skynet fears, to the safety fears, now the it's to powerful fears. All of these have been a play to get the government to lock out any smaller or foreign competitors and build a moat where there otherwise would be none.
- gowld 6mo agoWhat extortion are you claiming? Are you claiming there will be a fee?
- 6mo ago
- losvedir 6mo agoWell, I guess people who wanted more oversight and regulation on models will be happy.
- optimalsolver 6mo agoI'm not sure they envisioned models being interrogated to determine woke levels and their opinions on the 2020 election.
- timmg 6mo agoNot the person you are replying to: but I think that's the point.
- optimalsolver 6mo agoI'll admit that one flew over me. Ironically, an LLM would've probably picked up on the sarcasm.
- gowld 6mo ago> Commerce Department will evaluate the programs to test their capabilities and security With what competent staff?
- mocana 6mo agoQ: Is this a good government policy? A: Yes. Q: Does the government have the expertise, integrity, and credibility to regulate AI models? A: Color me sceptical.
- sigmar 6mo agoMoves like this make me wonder- What chance is there that these models are nationalized in the near future? What will happen to the investors/economy in such a scenario?
- m3kw9 6mo agoonce it gets nationalized, it will be plagued from red tape. The model will likely look like how china is controlling their AI. It's not nationalized, but they have a complete tight leash on it
- embedding-shape 6mo agoSo nationalized models === more openly available and downloadable models? Seems the argument you're trying to make says "less leash" rather than a stricter one.
- optimalsolver 6mo agoIt's not even hypothetical. Once these systems reach a certain level of capability, they WILL be nationalized ("We'll take it from here, boys").
- xhkkffbf 6mo agoNationalization often happens when growth ends. The Pennsylvania Railroad was private as long as the profits were rolling in. But once growth ended (because of cars and planes and buses and ....) the company went bankrupt. Then we ended up with Amtrak because the country needs a train system.
- ChrisArchitect 6mo agoPreviously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48013608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48013608