I am on the opposite side of what you are thinking.

- Blocking access to others (cursor, openai, opencode)

- Asking to regulate hardware chips more, so that they don't get good competition from Chinese labs

- partnerships with palantir, DoD as if it wasn't obvious how these organizations use technology and for what purposes.

at this scale, I don't think there are good companies. My hope is on open models, and only labs doing good in that front are Chinese labs.

▲

mym1990 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The problem is that "good" companies cannot succeed in a landscape filled with morally bad ones, when you are in a time of low morality being rewarded. Competing in a rigged market by trying to be 100% morally and ethically right ends up in not competing at all. So companies have to pick and choose the hills they fight on. If you take a look at how people are voting with their dollars by paying for these tools...being a "good" company doesn't seem to factor much into it on aggregate.

	▲	throwaw12 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		exactly. you cant compete morally when cheating, doing illegal things and supporting bad guys are norm. Hence, I hope open models will win in the long term. Similar to Oracle vs Postgres, or some closed source obscure caching vs Redis. One day I hope we will have very good SOTA open models where closed models compete to catch up (not saying Oracle is playing a catch up with Pg).

▲

esbranson 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Blocking access

> Asking to regulate hardware chips more

> partnerships with [the military-industrial complex]

> only labs doing good in that front are Chinese labs

That last one is a doozy.

▲

derac 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I agree, they seem to be following the Apple playbook. Make a closed off platform and present yourself as morally superior.