3 ms·

> But this is an unquestionably good thing right? Their efforts in open AI are by far the best thing Facebook/Meta have ever done. They opened the door to the

> But this is an unquestionably good thing right? Their efforts in open AI are by far the best thing Facebook/Meta have ever done. They opened the door to the Chinese, who are doing excellent work, and between them they are preventing the concentration of power and the rise of monopoly pricing. This is enough to absolve them of almost any sin. If I were a utilitarian, I'd unironically be a Zuckerberg fan right now.

lukan 2mo ago
"This is enough to absolve them of almost any sin. If I were a utilitarian, I'd unironically be a Zuckerberg fan right now." Well, if it were the only thing he is doing now, but FB is still controlling peoples social life with who knows what kind of intentions they train their algorithms for. But I can and do still welcome this move here.
- diegolas 2mo ago
  it's not that deep, they wan you scrolling the most time possible. it's absolutely escapable tho, literally not required for any activity whatsoever.
  - lukan 2mo ago
    Yeah, but if he can buy a bit of political power/more money on the side by promise to influence certain trends, I doubt he would say no on ethical grounds. (Just for the fear of whistleblowers I guess)
  - butlike 2mo ago
    Totally. The hard part is treating it like any other addiction. Time in absentia helps reduce the behavioral reinforcement. I don't even want to open Instagram anymore.
- basch 2mo ago
  Intention might be giving too much credit. If attention seeking “give the people what they want” is the goal, it’s a completely headless out of control cobra, not sinister well thought out objectives to control society.
- GetMeSoon 2mo ago
  > FB is still controlling peoples social life with who knows what kind of intentions they train their algorithms for. As opposed to literally any social network out there, right?
  - lukan 2mo ago
    Well, here on HN the intention seems to be to, to have interesting discussions. That works for me and other social media I do not use. Except well, various messenger to be in contact with the groups and people I choose with no engagement algorithm deciding what posts I see, simple chronological order.
  - soraminazuki 2mo ago
    What do you mean, "as opposed to"? Yes, there are other scumbag billionaires weaponizing their social media platforms to ruin society. No, that doesn't make Mark Zuckerberg a better person.
  - windexh8er 2mo ago
    I'm curious how well influence campaigns work on platforms like Mastodon, or even BlueSky. They are, likely, not sourced from the platform providers which is definitely not the case for FB.
dummydummy1234 2mo ago
Somewhat agree, but Facebook and social media are really bad though, even leaving aside extreme cases like Myanmar genocide promotion. I think Facebook would need to do a lot more to balance the scales.
waffletower 2mo ago
It absolutely does not absolve them of sin. But let's give them credit where it is due. Open models are a really good thing. Hopefully I won't be lynched by a mob in 3 years for once saying this.
beagle3 2mo ago
At the same time they are strongly promoting the OS age laws. One positive, in the eyes of many people, does not absolve for a large body of evil. For many it doesn’t even absolve a small body of evil deeds. (Zuck/Meta’s evil deeds are numerous and enormous)
popalchemist 2mo ago
Preventing one apocalypse is good but it doesn't absolve another.
applicative 2mo ago
The price of Kimi K3 is 'monopolistically' determined by contract with Moonshot. The weights are nominally on Hugging Face but can only be provided under contract with Moonshot, which specifies what the price can be. So it will be with the next Alibaba behemoth and, I would think, all others forever. Soon you will sing songs for the freedom Xi has given us when you read a declaration of 'open weights' ... for a model so huge it takes a nuclear powered data center to run and crashes the Hugging Face servers when it is uploaded. The Kimi K3 'weights' are an opaque blob that can only be used by contract.
- A_D_E_P_T 2mo ago
  > The Kimi K3 'weights' are an opaque blob that can only be used by contract. Have you looked at the contract? There are zero conditions unless you've broken $20M in revenue with their model. It doesn't even forbid distillation, lol > Soon you will sing songs for the freedom Xi has given us when you read a declaration of 'open weights' ... for a model so huge it takes a nuclear powered data center to run and crashes the Hugging Face servers when it is uploaded. Releasing a big open-weights model is... le bad? Am I understanding you correctly? There are small models out there if you want them, you know.
  - applicative 2mo ago
    Yes releasing a big open weight model to the Sinaloa cartel is bad. One could say the same about releasing it to the US military, according to political taste.
- stale2002 2mo ago
  > The Kimi K3 'weights' are an opaque blob that can only be used by contract. No they are not. You can just ignore the contract. Unless you are a multi-billion dollar company, nobody will notice and you will get away with it.
  - applicative 2mo ago
    You cannot ignore the contract unless you /are/ a multibillion dollar company and can run the model entirely internally. Or do you propose to run an instance of Kimi K3 on your laptop? Fireworks, Together, etc - who are providing inference precisely /for/ Moonshot as underlaborers - arranged contracts of their own in the weeks before the release. The press and social media offensive ignored that the release of open weights was merely a starting pistol for a pre-arranged use of foreign providers no different from US models' use of AWS It should be enought to dispel the strange illusion that providers are somehow independent free agents freely doing what they please with the free beer of Kimi K3 open weights that the prices on open router are within a couple pennies
razster 2mo ago
I'll never allow anything related by META to touch my system/workflow. They're a cancer and I will stick to that. I see 0 good from this.
breadramen 2mo ago
[dead]
floriferous 2mo ago
Let's be honest, their model is not good enough for them to get any ROI on it if it was closed source. They're making it look like a benevolent decision, but they really don't have another option.

lukan 2mo ago

"This is enough to absolve them of almost any sin. If I were a utilitarian, I'd unironically be a Zuckerberg fan right now." Well, if it were the only thing he is doing now, but FB is still controlling peoples social life with who knows what kind of intentions they train their algorithms for. But I can and do still welcome this move here.

diegolas 2mo ago
it's not that deep, they wan you scrolling the most time possible. it's absolutely escapable tho, literally not required for any activity whatsoever.
- lukan 2mo ago
  Yeah, but if he can buy a bit of political power/more money on the side by promise to influence certain trends, I doubt he would say no on ethical grounds. (Just for the fear of whistleblowers I guess)
- butlike 2mo ago
  Totally. The hard part is treating it like any other addiction. Time in absentia helps reduce the behavioral reinforcement. I don't even want to open Instagram anymore.
basch 2mo ago
Intention might be giving too much credit. If attention seeking “give the people what they want” is the goal, it’s a completely headless out of control cobra, not sinister well thought out objectives to control society.
GetMeSoon 2mo ago
> FB is still controlling peoples social life with who knows what kind of intentions they train their algorithms for. As opposed to literally any social network out there, right?
- lukan 2mo ago
  Well, here on HN the intention seems to be to, to have interesting discussions. That works for me and other social media I do not use. Except well, various messenger to be in contact with the groups and people I choose with no engagement algorithm deciding what posts I see, simple chronological order.
- soraminazuki 2mo ago
  What do you mean, "as opposed to"? Yes, there are other scumbag billionaires weaponizing their social media platforms to ruin society. No, that doesn't make Mark Zuckerberg a better person.
- windexh8er 2mo ago
  I'm curious how well influence campaigns work on platforms like Mastodon, or even BlueSky. They are, likely, not sourced from the platform providers which is definitely not the case for FB.

dummydummy1234 2mo ago

Somewhat agree, but Facebook and social media are really bad though, even leaving aside extreme cases like Myanmar genocide promotion. I think Facebook would need to do a lot more to balance the scales.

waffletower 2mo ago

It absolutely does not absolve them of sin. But let's give them credit where it is due. Open models are a really good thing. Hopefully I won't be lynched by a mob in 3 years for once saying this.

beagle3 2mo ago

At the same time they are strongly promoting the OS age laws. One positive, in the eyes of many people, does not absolve for a large body of evil. For many it doesn’t even absolve a small body of evil deeds. (Zuck/Meta’s evil deeds are numerous and enormous)

popalchemist 2mo ago

Preventing one apocalypse is good but it doesn't absolve another.

applicative 2mo ago

The price of Kimi K3 is 'monopolistically' determined by contract with Moonshot. The weights are nominally on Hugging Face but can only be provided under contract with Moonshot, which specifies what the price can be. So it will be with the next Alibaba behemoth and, I would think, all others forever. Soon you will sing songs for the freedom Xi has given us when you read a declaration of 'open weights' ... for a model so huge it takes a nuclear powered data center to run and crashes the Hugging Face servers when it is uploaded. The Kimi K3 'weights' are an opaque blob that can only be used by contract.

A_D_E_P_T 2mo ago
> The Kimi K3 'weights' are an opaque blob that can only be used by contract. Have you looked at the contract? There are zero conditions unless you've broken $20M in revenue with their model. It doesn't even forbid distillation, lol > Soon you will sing songs for the freedom Xi has given us when you read a declaration of 'open weights' ... for a model so huge it takes a nuclear powered data center to run and crashes the Hugging Face servers when it is uploaded. Releasing a big open-weights model is... le bad? Am I understanding you correctly? There are small models out there if you want them, you know.
- applicative 2mo ago
  Yes releasing a big open weight model to the Sinaloa cartel is bad. One could say the same about releasing it to the US military, according to political taste.
stale2002 2mo ago
> The Kimi K3 'weights' are an opaque blob that can only be used by contract. No they are not. You can just ignore the contract. Unless you are a multi-billion dollar company, nobody will notice and you will get away with it.
- applicative 2mo ago
  You cannot ignore the contract unless you /are/ a multibillion dollar company and can run the model entirely internally. Or do you propose to run an instance of Kimi K3 on your laptop? Fireworks, Together, etc - who are providing inference precisely /for/ Moonshot as underlaborers - arranged contracts of their own in the weeks before the release. The press and social media offensive ignored that the release of open weights was merely a starting pistol for a pre-arranged use of foreign providers no different from US models' use of AWS It should be enought to dispel the strange illusion that providers are somehow independent free agents freely doing what they please with the free beer of Kimi K3 open weights that the prices on open router are within a couple pennies

razster 2mo ago

I'll never allow anything related by META to touch my system/workflow. They're a cancer and I will stick to that. I see 0 good from this.

breadramen 2mo ago

[dead]

floriferous 2mo ago

Let's be honest, their model is not good enough for them to get any ROI on it if it was closed source. They're making it look like a benevolent decision, but they really don't have another option.