Because (collective) we don't own the tech. Frontier models are proprietary, their reasoning logic is hidden, and as seen with Fable the government giveth and taketh away on a whim.

Capabilities can be gated behind certification programs, or by money, or any other numerous corrupt and non-corrupt means. Model capabilities can be segregated by pricing tiers, creating an economic underclass that cannot afford access to frontier intelligence.

For humanity to benefit, the tech needs to be open and equally available to all.

▲

jrockway 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I agree with this. Computing as a field is the way it is because there is a low barrier to entry. My dad gave me a Tandy 1000 and some programming books, and now I have a very lucrative career. I never took any classes. I never had to beg anyone for permission. I could just get started making things with the minimal investment of a cheap personal computer. (And eventually, an Internet connection. Working with other people is fun!)

In a world where everyone is a Claude controller (something I honestly enjoy!), that goes away. I use hundreds of dollars of tokens a month. Suddenly, the kid in her basement with an unloved computer can't get in on the ground floor. You have to be rich to even get started. That worries me deeply. It's a big change for our field, and I don't think it's a good one.

▲

scottyah 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Did your dad give you a Tandy 1000 or a Cray X-MP/48? Do you really think you need the most top-of-the-line model to learn anything, or will a locally run gemma4 (or whatever it turns into) still get you going just the same as when you were a child?

	▲	jrockway 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's true, local models are good. The Tandy 1000 was really only good for a little bit QBASIC. Still fun! The other is that computing in general feels more accessible? While some models are free, you still can't easily make your own model. But I see the argument where you can't really just build your own computer anymore (no one person knows how to make a modern CPU, and you can't do it at home). You are always beholden to society, nothing truly starts in your basement at home. And it didn't in the nostalgia era that I remember either.

▲

axus 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AI isn't the problem, concentration of power is the problem. I think we agree!

▲

scottyah 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Your "concentration of power" is just two labs making models that most people prefer the last couple of months. Neither has more access to capital and resources than Google, more ability to pivot quickly than Xai, more access to labor than all of the Chinese labs, etc. How do you keep from a "concentration of power" without just forcing subsets of the population to use a known lesser model, or purposely kneecapping Research and Development at the labs that currently have the best models?

	▲	axus 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I was agreeing with the parent's conclusion: "For humanity to benefit, the tech needs to be open and equally available to all." Reducing the power of AI / restricting its export / arresting people who "use it wrong" is counter to that.

▲

scottyah 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you hate all lessons from humanity's past or just the most important ones? If it takes work from a specific subset of the population and isn't compensated, then my friend, what you advocate for is slavery...

▲

thewebguyd 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Ah yes, I forgot, Linus Torvalds and the thousands of others that built Linux over time are all slaves. Guess someone should probably go rescue them.

▲

scottyah 9 hours ago | parent [-]

None of them were compelled, and nobody is stopping you from running your own LLM generously provided by others. Doesn't mean when linux came out people nationalized Apple and Microsoft.

	▲	thewebguyd 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The risk I'm talking about isn't nationalization of companies, its corporate monopolization of frontier intelligence capabilities through capital consolidation and regulatory capture. "Just run your own LLM" ignores the asymmetry of frontier intelligence. You can build an operating system in your garage with just time and cheap hardware. You cannot go build GPT-5. And that's the problem with keeping it proprietary. If the primary cognitive engines of human progress are consolidated within just a handful of closed, proprietary cartels that can gate, alter, and revoke capabilities at will it creates a permanent economic underclass. The foundational infrastructure of our collective future shouldn't be entirely walled off. Fair compensation for a commercial product doesn't mean monopolization of foundational capabilities.