| |
| ▲ | minraws 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | OpenAI & Anthropic are deeply in bed with US govt, and they need US govt approval before model releases, and all US Companies under various acts need to share data with the govt. I mean sure there are investors and a little more open-ness, but with the example of Mythos we don't even know if public will get access to the "good" stuff because it's too dangerous. If your only opinion on trusting these companies more than one based in China is, they are Chinese then good luck, all the best. | | |
| ▲ | estearum 14 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The difference is "the various acts" in the US are things that are largely very hard to do, extremely limited in scope, and companies who dispute the government's propriety can (and do) go to court to fight it. Sure "China bad, US good" is naive, but certainly not more naive than suggesting that companies and individuals have similar rights and protections as each other. > and they need US govt approval before model releases This is just not true and it would be a gigantic legal battle to make it true against the model companies' wishes, which is indicative of your entire misunderstanding here. | | |
| ▲ | adrian_b 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | There was recently some announcement from the US govt itself (after the Mythos announcement) that they were pondering about allowing model releases from now on only after approving them. So it may not be strictly true for the moment, but it is certainly something that the current US govt can mandate at any time. | | |
| ▲ | estearum 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The US government just saying they were pondering something is: 1) Far from them actually trying to do it 2) Very, very far from them actually doing it successfully The US government absolutely cannot "just tell" private entities what products they're allowed to create and sell, and the fact that LLMs are arguably a form of expression will make these particular products extremely hard to regulate – especially as a broad "government checkpoint" on incremental product updates. In China, it really is as simple as the government deciding that it doesn't like your products and ta-da, you can no longer sell them. It's beyond naive to act like these are similar in any meaningful sense. | |
| ▲ | Danox 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Nonsense, the genie is out of the bottle worldwide and it isn’t going back in, and due to the activity of the current US government America’s standing, is declining most countries going into the future are going to hedge against the United States and whatever it says the good old days (goodwill/the small benefit of the doubt) are gone. The AI oligarchs have no loyalty and when it comes to making money and they will drop the king at their first opportunity and the king in return will do the same. |
|
| |
| ▲ | bandrami 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Well, I mean, just as a legal question I'm not allowed to use Chinese software at work, so yeah that's kind of definitive for me | |
| ▲ | nl 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > and they need US govt approval before model releases This isn't the case (yet). | | |
| ▲ | irthomasthomas 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is for models trained with 10^26 flops. Anthropic confirmed Mythos was less than this. You could estimate the upper bound on model size from this. | | |
| ▲ | nl 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's the Biden executive order. It's notify only - the company must tell the government but the government doesn't approve or allow the release. | | |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | throawayonthe 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | but we know who they are? how is this relevant |
|
