| ▲ | wolttam 14 hours ago |
| No way this can go wrong for the U.S. economy! Do everything you can to protect the existing incumbents, pay no mind to the wider consequences. Winning strategy. |
|
| ▲ | telep-io 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Doesn't help how the us gov is saying Kimi 3 stole IP of Fable even though it's not possible to distill Fable in 1 month. |
| |
| ▲ | Someone1234 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | And they've provided no technical explanation of how... This may be an odd reference, but I remember this song and dance with Roomba Vs. Roborock. "Roborock stole our IP!!!" but the problem was that song was slightly believable in the very early days, then Roborock started releasing products far better than anything Roomba had, but the tune in the US never changed. Literally for years after Roborock's products were two generations better than Roomba, but somehow they "stole" that? China has money, talent, and cheap electricity/superior infrastructure. The US's big AI built their products on stolen copyright material and social media scraping. China likely got a catchup boost via distilling, but recently a lot of their AI ventures have come fully online, and they've just throwing tons of compute/power at the problem, and we're starting to see legitimately competitive products without shortcuts/cheating. But the US won't change its tune; and that's convenient because they don't really want to compete, but rather roll out protectionism and fear per normal. | |
| ▲ | chlee 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | the rumor in chinese web is the following. Z.ai found a way to crack/overcome the cryptography that safeguarded Claude/Fable's thinking tokens in Claude Code, so Z.ai had the ability to peak into decrypted thinking tokens that Fable produced in Claude Code. Z.ai also shared their findings with other big LLM companies like Moonshot AI, which had 20,000+ accounts speed running through Fable to get their hands on as many high quality thinking tokens as possible for distillation. https://github.com/rgreenblatt/which_claude_is_k3/blob/main/... https://x.com/alex_prompter/status/2079625670918046048 Like all rumors, who knows what's true or what's not. | | | |
| ▲ | echelon 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's wild. It was only 15 days. It would have been impossible to gather enough data AND clean it up AND train AND do post training in just 15 days. edit: the Anthropic employee downvotes are coming in now. This was +8, now it's +3. | | |
| ▲ | benjiro29 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > It was only 15 days. That, and usage was also half. Given the fact that we seen not any evidence beyond people "see, it one shot X game looks similar to Fable" (a lot of one shots look similar to other models). You expect to see something from Fable its restrictions/fallback behavior popping up in K3. You do not filter out all that behavior. Especially on such a short notice. For me the milk example, where somebody asked if some EU cheese's had type A/B milk type (they are allergic), triggering bio restriction prompts. That just shows you how hard it is to find all those restrictions because its not in obvious spots where Fable goes off. Yet, not a single person has shown this behavior in K3... The funny thing is, other Chinese companies can train on K3 when the open weight are released next week. So even if K3 was or was not trained on Fable, they already have a alternative to get their models to the same level. | |
| ▲ | luckystarr 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Then it's a case of trying to uphold the narrative? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | solenoid0937 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Distills are bad for the US economy because they compress margins that otherwise go to pushing the frontier. You'd see model progress dramatically slowed if US companies had to compete on distills. |
| |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > You'd see model progress dramatically slowed if US companies had to compete on distills We’re already competing on distills—they exist. The question is whether America will actually compete or if it will lean into its populist tendency and cede the market globally to China. | | |
| ▲ | solenoid0937 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | If you want the cost of today's intelligence to go down, distills are fantastic. If you want AGI to arrive sooner, distills force you to move your compute off the frontier and will necessarily delay it significantly. It's a question of what you actually want out of the AI race. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | > If you want AGI to arrive sooner Yeah, I don’t buy this is happening. I’m open to being wrong. But folks who believe that can put their money where their mouths are in terms for stumping up cash for the training. > distills force you to move your compute off the frontier Versus moving it to inference? | | |
| ▲ | solenoid0937 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | I guess I don't know how you can use the latest models and feel that we are not on the verge of some kind of intelligence. Maybe it's your harness, maybe your problems aren't complicated enough. I find it bizarre to outright dismiss the possibility of AGI in this day and age. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | brazukadev 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | bad for the US economy but good for the World economy. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | > bad for the US economy Almost certainly not in the long term. If AI is a productivity enhancer, which I think we have evidence for, then the American economy’s heft (and continuing dynamism) get a tailwind. The minority of the new, leveraged economy getting hit will be a short-term painful adjustment, but it need not be anything more. | | |
| ▲ | everforward 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The distills are almost certainly bad for the US economy. AIs promise is undercutting knowledge work, which is our primary export. Manufacturing left ages ago. In theory, if OpenAI/Anthropic win then the US still wins since they’re headquartered here. If open or Chinese models succeed, it undercuts our knowledge work market and that money starts flowing out to inference providers instead of in to US companies and their employees. | | | |
| ▲ | brazukadev 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The longer the US AI strategy continues to be to bet on openai/anthropic the bigger it will be the US economy impact. The US bounced back from the dotcom crash and the 2008 crash, it does not mean it will bounce back after an AI crash. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > it does not mean it will bounce back after an AI crash It almost certainly will. AI dominates growth. It doesn’t dominate the actual economy. Most spending and investment is entirely decoupled from it. | |
| ▲ | wolttam 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Well, one thing it will still have is a boat-load of compute. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | embedding-shape 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Clearly worked for Oracle and Intel, who are still making their executives rich. What do you mean "average person", who gives a fuck about those? |
|
| ▲ | paulpan 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| It's the exact parallel of how it'll play out for U.S. automakers: destined for irrelevance given their inability or unwillingness to compete against China in the EV market. Instead they pretend EVs are bad and cry for protectionist policies. The sad fact here is that OpenAI and Anthropic are only looking for a max 1-year runway (Anthropic's is only a few months away) so that they can IPO and their VC investors cash out immensely. They do not care about AI safety or fairness, only to appease their VC overlords. But the public is being lied to and pitched this narrative that "open weight AI models are all bad". |
