| ▲ | copypaper 2 days ago |
| Let's also not forget SoTA models stole from us. |
|
| ▲ | gordonhart 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| True, and they're being tried in a federal court of law for it. NYT v. OpenAI is still very much alive, these things just take a while. Can the same be said about DeepSeek or any other open-source model provider performing distillation? |
| |
| ▲ | copypaper 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Pandora's box has already been opened and there is no going back. I doubt OpenAI, et al will get anything but a slap on the wrist in court because punishing AI companies would have a negative effect on the US economy. >Can the same be said about DeepSeek or any other open-source model provider performing distillation? Open source models that distill from SoTA reminds me of the story of Robin Hood -- robbing the rich and giving it to the poor. So to answer your question: yes, but it's better than the alternative where only a select few companies have SoTA models. | | | |
| ▲ | riskd 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You already know what the results of this “trial” will be. Let’s not pretend. | |
| ▲ | paweladamczuk a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | >these thing just take a while Oh, so people might be forced to give back the AI earnings? Should I be worried about the last year's capital gains on my portfolio? |
|
|
| ▲ | vatsachak 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Literally. Altman and Amodei are so mad about muhh model when they steal our data and pollute the Internet with slop. |
|
| ▲ | 93po 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| let's not forget that calling copyright infringement theft is hyperbole, and the claim that AI is even infringing is also dubious at best, and that the concept of intellectual property at all is also ethically dubious |
