> And the moment that happens, Taiwan will instantly vote to rejoin china.
Sounds inflammatory, and also extremely unlikely and has no evidence for it, and also the hyperlinked article, that is supposed to back it up, absolutely does not even try to do so. I don't think reading further is worthwhile.
Gosh, I think you don’t realize how horrible copyright legislation is.
It is a tool to keep the rich rich and the poor poor.
There is no excuse for keeping secrets. We are all human and the more knowledge we share the better the world is.
Let’s stop competing and counting our coins and just be thankful they are leading the world in character.
As an American I’m grateful that they don’t do a lot of copyright over there, because copyright fosters an us vs them mentality which leads to reinventing the wheel, and sadness.
People were designed for love, and that’s what all Americans should do.
The solution isn’t fighting for American dominance. It’s asking OpenAI to be open again. That’s what life looks like!
I find this author's line of argumentation tenuous as best. I don't recall the memo that forced the West, and the US specifically, to rush along in a AI-first, or really, AI-only strategy.
I also recall clearly when OpenAI stopped publishing open models, or the safety concerned Anthropic was arguing they need regulations to smother competition from all sides.
Neither have we collectively even begun to assess the true economic cost of dashing to build trillions of data centers, in either first or second order effects.
One thing that does seem clear is that the benefits of AI, as the US practices them, seem, as always to be intended to be concentrated in the hands of the few.
But all these points are about the social context. To return to the substance; how did China induce a capitalistic psychosis of profit chasing in our society? Is it a long malaise of inequality that meant the only path of ascension for smart capable individual was software development, a path that VCs were dreaming of removing to make capital more efficient for themselves? The same VC's that now want to cry they no longer have the lead over open weight models, that their investments and dreams of exclusive access are now defunct?
I don't dream of Chinese overlords, but neither am I blind to the US version. I rarely feel revulsion of this level, except when coming across a hypocritical, vacuous piece that demands, somehow, that we should do something about the fact that other people and societies might, for some reason, not want to follow in spending untold trillions into this technology. And if releasing an open model is all it took to collapse the US economic model, maybe that's the sign that it was on it's last legs.
> And the moment that happens, Taiwan will instantly vote to rejoin china.
Sounds inflammatory, and also extremely unlikely and has no evidence for it, and also the hyperlinked article, that is supposed to back it up, absolutely does not even try to do so. I don't think reading further is worthwhile.
Gosh, I think you don’t realize how horrible copyright legislation is.
It is a tool to keep the rich rich and the poor poor.
There is no excuse for keeping secrets. We are all human and the more knowledge we share the better the world is.
Let’s stop competing and counting our coins and just be thankful they are leading the world in character.
As an American I’m grateful that they don’t do a lot of copyright over there, because copyright fosters an us vs them mentality which leads to reinventing the wheel, and sadness.
People were designed for love, and that’s what all Americans should do.
The solution isn’t fighting for American dominance. It’s asking OpenAI to be open again. That’s what life looks like!
I find this author's line of argumentation tenuous as best. I don't recall the memo that forced the West, and the US specifically, to rush along in a AI-first, or really, AI-only strategy.
I also recall clearly when OpenAI stopped publishing open models, or the safety concerned Anthropic was arguing they need regulations to smother competition from all sides.
Neither have we collectively even begun to assess the true economic cost of dashing to build trillions of data centers, in either first or second order effects.
One thing that does seem clear is that the benefits of AI, as the US practices them, seem, as always to be intended to be concentrated in the hands of the few.
But all these points are about the social context. To return to the substance; how did China induce a capitalistic psychosis of profit chasing in our society? Is it a long malaise of inequality that meant the only path of ascension for smart capable individual was software development, a path that VCs were dreaming of removing to make capital more efficient for themselves? The same VC's that now want to cry they no longer have the lead over open weight models, that their investments and dreams of exclusive access are now defunct?
I don't dream of Chinese overlords, but neither am I blind to the US version. I rarely feel revulsion of this level, except when coming across a hypocritical, vacuous piece that demands, somehow, that we should do something about the fact that other people and societies might, for some reason, not want to follow in spending untold trillions into this technology. And if releasing an open model is all it took to collapse the US economic model, maybe that's the sign that it was on it's last legs.
Add this to the pile of consent manufacturing pieces for regulating open weights models.
It's not good enough for these bay area founders and private labs to have siphoned off the worlds information.
> If you think Sam Altman is as dangerous to democracy as the CCP controlling the world, you're part of the problem.
If you think in a way that (we) don't agree with, then you're a (communist, terrorist, ccp sympathizer).
Download all the weights you can now. If these folks get their way, it might be a decade before they're accessible again.
But at least the economy won't have crashed, what with all of the people that can afford groceries and a decent way of life.