stale2002

If your definition of VC is "Literally anything that requires a long term investment of money" then sure, but I think most people mean something different than that.

What do you mean, I thought it was fun.

Feel free to not make your own music videos, but I am not sure why you would be so upset about other people having fun.

I'm surprised that the Author has missed a very important corollary to the diffusion of "genius theft" that they are bringing up.

And that is the diffusion of the beneficiaries. Maybe they think that OpenAI and Anthropic are actually worth, like a trillion dollars each and can therefore have value extracted from them. I'm not so convinced.

What if there aren't frontier labs spending billions on training a model. What if, instead, open source is at least mostly competitive with the top models. And if the models are open source (or weights, whatever you want to call it) the people benefiting are actually just rando people or startup founders.

What are you going to do if you want to extract this value from this diffuse set of beneficiaries? Put an arbitrary tax on anyone living on San Francisco or something??

The reality is that the author is trying to put the genie back into the bottle. All technological progress has winners and losers. It has people who are even benefiting from the rest of society and making personal gain based on that.

But, at the end of the day, doing accounting math on how much an individual benefited from a specific common good as vague as societal knowledge is impractical. And yet technological progress benefits all of society in a wholistic sense.

Additionally, the author focuses so much on the extraction of a public good, I am surprised that they failed to address that these labs are creating a public good as well. Who's to say that this "theft" is larger than the production of public goods that these labs give to the public in the first place.

I mean, my life has been massively improved by the fact that I have access to these models. And I'm not convinced that I have produce enough myself to outweigh this benefit that they are giving to me, so I consider it to be a fair trade.

The people saying that jobs will all go away because of technology have been wrong every single year, up to this year as well.

The burden of proof seems like it's actually on you to show why this current tech boom is any different from previous ones.

As to the answer to your question, well just look at what people are doing at their jobs today. Those are what replaced jobs from 2 years ago.

Seeing as we are talking about it now, it seems like they were right that it is interesting to the public.

I am not sure why you think social media attention needs to be gate kept.

Journalists are meant to report on the news. This sounds like an interesting piece of science/news to me.

Counter protesting people who are destroying a community seems like a perfectly laudable goal to me.

He certainly wasn't expecting to have to shoot someone, but that's the case for most examples of self defense.

No it's not unintuitive.

Just like I can learn from a book and nobody can make that illegal, so can other people transformative do the same with computers.

Fair use is fair use.

So, why all this "effort" to protect the model?

Because it's their model and business and they are free to use the free market to do exactly that?

That's their free market rights too. If you don't like it, use another model (which they would be fine with).

If it was illegal to go somewhere "lookin for trouble" I think that you would see a whole lot of people arrested from certain groups that you likely wouldn't want to be in prison.

Almost nobody is covered by non compete agreements. And if you think you are, you should just ignore it anyway.

They are often both illegal and unenforced. Your old employer isn't going to waste time hiring a private detective to track down every former employee's new work place that you didn't include on LinkedIn.

Well it would be anyone that has access to a datacenter to run them. Which is a ton of companies. And those companies will rent out access to those models. And if they do something stupid to screw over consumers, well the whole point is that there would be a bunch of companies that you could use instead.

I am sorry to be the one to tell you but it was already the case that you cannot trust LLMs to solve all your problems 100% of the time.

It was always random. This is no different than any other randomness that already exists in LLMS.

If you are concerned just do benchmarks and see if it is valuable for your usecase regardless.

Of course you can trust them.

Just do benchmarks yourself on the new model and decide if it is valuable for your usecase, even with the supposed nerfing.

Benchmarks are benchmarks. And you can ignore the data at your own risk.

They are actually designated as a terrorist organization by a very large number of countries. Almost every country in that region does, and around the world.

Also, they do all sorts of things. The big one was contributing to the deaths many people in syria. I think thats more than enough for countries to call them a terrorist organization as they do now.

Its pretty horrible. You can look it up here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah_involvement_in_the_S...

There are not large 40 thousand plus armed terrorists groups that have been being armed for decades and have been shooting rockets at Israel for years in either Jordan or Egypt. And Syria has significantly improved their relations with Israel recently.

Nobody in those countries are seriously suggesting that there is going to be some war with Israel anytime soon, and relations are as good as they have ever been.

The western nations that enabled this genocide and colonialist project can take in those who leave.

The much much more likely situation is that a third of gazans leave based on plans that western governments have made for gaza that are already public.

Thats the outcome that those groups are currently on a clear trajectory towards, that might not even be stoppable at this point, TBH.

Then what? More yelling online about "zionists" doesn't rebuild the mass rubble that gaza has already been turned into.

But hey, feel free to check up on gaza in a year and see if things have gotten any better, or if it has instead just been more people sacrificing their lives for nothing with no progress towards a better future.

This is yet another reason why they must be quickly stopped.

Nuclear weapons are meant to stop countries from being destroyed, for every country that has thems.

Thats why countries get those nuclear weapons in the first place. To use in a last resort in case they are destroyed. They even have fancy words for it, like "mutually assured destruction".

I doubt you have invented a nuke shield. Meaning that, for all countries that have nuclear weapons, destroying them is a very bad idea.

We of course care about human life

If you are talking so cavalierly about destroying a country that has nuclear weapons, it would not seem like you care much about the arab lives that live there. It seems like you would rather the arabs throw there lives away, for nothing, for decades to come. All for some silly obsession with destroying a nuclear armed country, no matter how many women and children have to die along to way to fail to do much of anything against them.

Just look around you dude. Gaza is entirely rubble. Most of Israel's enemies are in shambles, and former enemies of Israel from decades past have strong alliances with Israel now.

The axis of resistance failed. And coping about it will just get more arabs killed for nothing. Most people don't want to throw their lives away for nothing. They want to move on and have peace. And it is rich to see foreigners so giddy about the idea of more dead arabs sacrificing themselves for the cause.

But hey, its not like it really matters much anymore. I expect that Israel's enemies and Gaza's fate is sealed at this point, and when immigration opens up in a couple years 1/3rd to half of the population there will resettle outside of palestine. Its sad, but hey, most people there don't want to live in tents forever.

The Assad regime fell

They didn't have nuclear weapons. And if they did, most people who aren't stupid would be hesitant about trying to destroy them.

the Palestinians (and Muslims in general) do not have an issue with cohabitating with jews

Then the solution is simple. Give up on the idea of trying to destroy a nuclear armed country. Easy right? Just accept peace instead of risking the lives of all the arabs in the region for a doomed goal that only will kill many many many more arabs if it ever came anyone close to being enacted.

Fear is not equivalent to zionism.

Saying that it's a bad idea to destroy Israel absolutely is Zionist.

It's accepting that Israel will exist and attempts to destroy it should not be enacted. In this case, because of the nuclear war.

and is getting destroyed at this very moment.

No they aren't. Russia isn't going to collapse as a country. Thats ridiculous. The worst case scenario for them is continued economic damage and a full withdrawal from Ukraine.

But Moscow going under was never on the table, and yeah if it was actually truly threaten by an invading army, I'd absolutely expect nuclear weapons to be in the table.

To apply the same thing to Israel, sure in some wild world that isn't the current universe, I could see them being pushed out of, like their current Lebanon areas and for the fighting to stop in Gaza, ect. And nuclear weapons aren't going to be used.

But that's not the same as Jerusalem being threatened. Yes, if an invade army was taking over half the country, with boots on the ground, yes the nukes would fly.

It arguably almost happened in fact, in one of the previous Arab wars. Nothing even close to that will happen any time soon though (because Israel isn't losing).

they will not be able to sustain themselves

A nuclear armed country wouldn't go down without a fight.

I'm also not sure who is even left to do anything about Israel. The entirety of Gaza is rubble and southern Lebanon is soon to follow. And Iran can't destroy Israel with its dwindling missile stocks, they'd need a ground army for that.

But if it actually came down to it, they would kill every last one of their enemies if their existence was actually threatened.

Given that fact, anyone who's wants it to be destroyed must have a seething deep hatred for the Palestinians and all the rest of the arabs that would die in the process.

I don't think most people out there hate the Palestinians so much that they would want to see them all die in nuclear hellfire, no.

But hey, maybe you know more people than I do that wouldn't care about the millions of Arabs that would die in the inevitable nuclear war.

Having opinions on where tax dollars go has little do to with someone advocating for destroying an entire nuclearly armed country.

Basically nobody in the USA wants it do that.

Try open sourcing a code base that is built up over the last 15 years and most of the devs no longer work there. Thats what you’re asking for many online games.

Thats pretty easy actually.

All you have to do is go into the setting page on the git repo and change the settings from private to public.

I'm sure most game devs are able to figure that one out.

Everything else that resolves was that is merely consequences for which I have little pitty for.

Of course it's true.

Israel has 200+ nuclear weapons. Most people aren't stupid enough to think that trying to destroy a country with 200+ nuclear weapons is a good idea.

If they understand this simply idea, that makes them a zionist, almost by definition.

The vast majority of people in the USA do not want to destroy the state of Israel so I am not sure why you are making some conspiracy about (((zionists))) controlling big tech companies.

Basically everyone in the US is a zionist. Especially once you point out that Israel has 200+ nuclear weapons and it would be a horrible idea to try and destroy them.

There isn't a non-military, non bomb use for the amount of Uranium that Iran was enriching up to the levels that they were doing so.

All the things that you talked about do not require doing what Iran was doing. Meaning that... the only motivation left would be the 1 single thing that does require that much enrichment to those levels.

Hitting this from another angle, it doesn't make any strategic sense as for why Iran would sacrifice all that it is throwing away, just to get some medical research benefits. That would be a poor deal, and Iran isn't stupid.

a mix of extreme economic and diplomatic pressure.

None of which matters if the demand that you are making on them would amount to (in their opinion, not yours) their own destruction. There is no threats that you can enact on them that would ever cause them to voluntarily do what they believe would destroy their own country and the people/military living their would rather go out fighting. Of which they are capable of doing so, with that modern military and 200+ nuclear weapons.

Thats the thing about those strategies. If the other party just refuses to budge, it doesn't really matter how much diplomatic or economic pressure that you put on the nuclear armed power. They can just refuse the demands and you are out of luck.

Israel has a modern military and 200+ nuclear weapons that they would absolutely use in a last resort scenario (like all countries would). They are not going away anytime soon, nor are their days numbered.

Like geez, we can't even get rid of North Korea, how are people expecting to successfully destroy a nuclear armed power without getting everyone else in that area killed? Its delusional.

if no one can run the binaries, despite them being accessible, then the regulation has failed and there will be a new movement to alter the regulation.

This isn't the 2000s. People can rent a computer out of a data center. This isn't some hard problem here.

What are the legal consequences of not releasing a functioning server if for some reason you can't?

How about "the government forces you to release the code"? That's seems fair.

Unless you hid your source code in USB drives under your bed, the government can probably just force GitHub (or similar )to release it. I bet they've got it backed up.

do you really believe a basic income funded by it will make up that loss? It won't.

Almost definitionally it would. If society is saving a bunch of money on all that saved labor, that extra value is still there, it just needs to be appropriately redistributed