• Lexi Sneptaur@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    This is completely laughable for anyone who knows anything about open source or how China works.

    Sam Altman, OpenAI’s chief executive, has framed the competition between American and Chinese A.I. companies as ideological and said he wants to “make sure democratic A.I. wins over authoritarian A.I.”

    Hmm yes, by doing things open-source, clearly this is authoritarian, because I can’t make money off of it. Bawwwww.

    I hope that whiny little liar loses his entire ass, financially.

    • IsaamoonKHGDT_6143@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Sam Altman He doesn’t own any OpenAI shares as far as I know. He has investments in other companies such as Reddit (Has 9% of the shares), Helion Energy, Boom Technology and others.

      Although some also failed and others continue, but go unnoticed. In summary Sam can’t lose the money unless all the companies go under.

    • Booboofinger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I don’t see how open-source can be authoritarian. I mess with generative AI as a hobby, mainly image creation. While closed source models like Runway and Klink are impressive open-source ones like Wan2.1 are just so much more flexible. Mostly thanks to Loras and controlnets developed by hobbyists or 3rd parties. Not only that, but the fact you can generate locally till little hearts content for free is so much more enjoyable then getting nickel and dimed by some AI company.

        • xep@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Corporations are run like autocracies, too, so there’s some irony in that.

      • SheeEttin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Embrace, extend, extinguish.

        They can take open-source products, extend them to become the dominant player, and then close them.

        Yeah it’s a violation of the license. What are you gonna do about it?

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          14 hours ago

          They’re the ones who are putting the open-source base models out in the first place. If I write a program myself and release it as open source, I have every right to subsequently release a closed-source version. But I can’t rescind the license on the version I released previously (any open source license with a clause allowing that should be treated with immense suspicion) so anyone else can keep building on that version if they want.

        • ikt@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Yeah it’s a violation of the license. What are you gonna do about it?

          I’ll keep supporting Mistral 😶‍🌫️

      • altkey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        You don’t need to close the source to make X authoritatian. The existing unequality in (computational) power can’t be penetrated as it is, without regulations, that’s why it’s so sexy for Google and the likes, and the only reason to close the source for them is to fuck with each other. The means of training models and dictating their usage is in the hands of those who can afford that.

        If one day portrayal of taco gets shadowbanned and you’d want to generate one, you’d not find a big model that can draw it unless you waste days training your own Taco model.