4 ms·
they're setting the scene for an attempt to scare the geriatric decision makers into banning free and open source ML, as it's the industry's only real competiti
by functionmouse 4mo ago
they're setting the scene for an attempt to scare the geriatric decision makers into banning free and open source ML, as it's the industry's only real competition
- SpaceL10n 4mo agoor are you setting the scene for well-meaning technocrats to back unrestricted AI development in hopes it will bring about utopia while dismissing the damage it could cause in the hands of adversarial groups?
- nicman23 4mo agofight fight fight fight
- functionmouse 4mo agotl;dr super AI is like a necessary bush fire AI isn't that scary. But I've also got some extreme minority opinions like "Never give a website your real name" and "Computers should not be used for banking" and "Don't believe anything you hear online". The worst I see AI/ML doing to society is shining an unmistakable light onto the blind spots people have already been exploiting for decades. Y2k forced us to patch the integer bug. Super AI will force us to reevaluate what cyber security even is.
- SpaceL10n 4mo agoYes but don't we still try to control brush fires so they don't burn down neighborhoods?
- soupfordummies 4mo agothe current buzz about "sharing the wealth" with these AI co.s also smells of "sure we'll give you some back, just don't regulate us, see you dont need to, we're sharing our shares!"
- usefulcat 4mo ago> free and open source ML What does that mean exactly? Like sure, you can get some freely available weights and run them on your own hardware, but where did those weights come from? Was the training process in any way "open", or are you simply relying on a handout from some other (probably large, probably corporate) organization that has the resources to do the actual training?
- eikenberry 4mo agoThey probably meant both. Open training data is obviously better than open weight, but open weight is still much, much better than closed SAAS models.