Which was extra rich because Bill Gates was pretty active on open source forums getting help developing his early programs that made MS into what it was, as well as using his school's computers, which weren't supposed to be used for commercial activity, then when he was trying to sell his shit, he was outraged at all the people willing to give their software away for free. He's a personification of the pulling the ladder up after him image.
And he maintains that stance to this day, with one of the goals of his foundation (which he started at the advice of his father wanting to look better after the embarrassment of the anti-trust case where he looked completely out of touch during his testimony and didn't take much comfort that the government pretty much just backed down after winning and didn't force MS to break up) being that someone profits from the medical advancements they support. It doesn't have to be him, but he is vehemently against the idea that anyone just share ideas for everyone's benefit rather than people making profits from it.
IIRC those open source models are trained on the output of OpenAI and Anthropic's models anyway.
And the plagiarism machine owners complaining about others plagiarizing their plagiarism machine is still one of the funniest things to happen in all of this.
Well because, see all the dumbasses running around believing that llms can reason, have a personality and replace humans? Thats because dumbass ceos said so. So, thats the only reason I care, currently.
Everything has the potential to be very dangerous, your cleaning products in your home are potentially very dangerous... The only thing open source AI is a danger to is the owners of these AI companies who have pumped all their money into nvidias pockets and are now sad they won't be able to recoup that monumental loss of profit.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying we need to protect the power of the AI companies. But what they’re saying is factually not wrong. AI has the potential to be dangerous. Significantly more than household cleaning products.
You can literally kill everyone in the house by mixing two bottles of household cleaner. Like you're just completely ignoring the physical danger of house stoves and cleaning products, and only counting the theoretical data damage that could be done with AI. How are you gonna physically injure someone with AI from your house??
Fact is, the AI that is dangerous is not giving advice about how to get to a car wash. It’s building hacks and scams etc. At a level and scale we’ve never seen before.
I think the lesson that should be taken from this is not that we need to prevent open source AI from coming out. We should recognize that Anthropic is in control of weapons that should be regulated by the government more heavily than it is. And society as a whole should be preparing for the “mythos” style AI to be open sourced. Which is inevitable from the sounds of it.
We've had hacks and scams before. AI is just another tool making it easier than before to do it. Doing criminal acts are already illegal. Both with and without the use of AI.
I'm not sure how it could even be regulated. In my view it's probably too late for any societal regulation. AI is open source and anyone can host it at home. I wouldn't mind some regulation for corporations though.
I don't see the difference, you can easily burn down your whole house with the stove, the fire can spread through the neighborhood. Yet, just about everyone has a stove. Local AI will be the same after a decade or so.
52 Comments
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world · 46 pts · 46d
Remember when Microsoft said open source was dangerous?
naeap@sopuli.xyz · 29 pts · 46d
Dangerous?
They said Linux and open source is fucking cancer
And I'm pretty much quoting here - emphasise on just pretty much
AbidingOhmsLaw@lemmy.ml · 12 pts · 46d
When all along it was Mico$oft that was the cancer.
Lydia_K@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 46d
Embrace, Extend, Extinguish
Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de · 11 pts · 46d
Dangerous to profits. Please think of the shareholders!
lettruthout@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 46d
…and the Billionaires!
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 45d
Which was extra rich because Bill Gates was pretty active on open source forums getting help developing his early programs that made MS into what it was, as well as using his school's computers, which weren't supposed to be used for commercial activity, then when he was trying to sell his shit, he was outraged at all the people willing to give their software away for free. He's a personification of the pulling the ladder up after him image.
And he maintains that stance to this day, with one of the goals of his foundation (which he started at the advice of his father wanting to look better after the embarrassment of the anti-trust case where he looked completely out of touch during his testimony and didn't take much comfort that the government pretty much just backed down after winning and didn't force MS to break up) being that someone profits from the medical advancements they support. It doesn't have to be him, but he is vehemently against the idea that anyone just share ideas for everyone's benefit rather than people making profits from it.
MutantTailThing@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 46d
Do we really need CEOs?
Zachariah@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 46d
making CEOs at home is a very dangerous path
zurohki@aussie.zone · 19 pts · 46d
IIRC those open source models are trained on the output of OpenAI and Anthropic's models anyway.
And the plagiarism machine owners complaining about others plagiarizing their plagiarism machine is still one of the funniest things to happen in all of this.
certified_expert@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 45d
How is that actually pulled off? (train on the output of another AI? That would burn so many tokens through the "regular" ways, no?
Mniot@programming.dev · 2 pts · 45d
Here's Anthropic claiming that Alibaba created 25k free accounts to crawl them: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/06/anthropic-claims-alibaba-defied-trump-to-attack-claude-and-steal-capabilities/
WhiteRice@lemmy.ml · 14 pts · 45d
TheIvoryTower@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 39d
Pravin Lal???
thatsnomayo@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 46d
Explaining the harmfulness of monopoly & regulatory capture to an American:
Imagine at home there is no burger
DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 45d
Why do people even care about what a CEO says anyway? Fuck them. They only care about themselves and say shit that benefits them.
trackball_fetish@lemmy.wtf · 2 pts · 45d
Well because, see all the dumbasses running around believing that llms can reason, have a personality and replace humans? Thats because dumbass ceos said so. So, thats the only reason I care, currently.
grandma@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 45d
Okay and what are you gonna do? Geographically restrict an algorithm like they tried with encryption?
danc4498@lemmy.world · -17 pts · 46d
They’re clearly 2 wildly different things. This is more like a weapons manufacturer saying homemade explosives are dangerous.
Open source AI has the potential to be very dangerous.
BucketBong@p.hobo.social · 22 pts · 46d
Everything has the potential to be very dangerous, your cleaning products in your home are potentially very dangerous... The only thing open source AI is a danger to is the owners of these AI companies who have pumped all their money into nvidias pockets and are now sad they won't be able to recoup that monumental loss of profit.
danc4498@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 46d
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying we need to protect the power of the AI companies. But what they’re saying is factually not wrong. AI has the potential to be dangerous. Significantly more than household cleaning products.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 45d
You can literally kill everyone in the house by mixing two bottles of household cleaner. Like you're just completely ignoring the physical danger of house stoves and cleaning products, and only counting the theoretical data damage that could be done with AI. How are you gonna physically injure someone with AI from your house??
danc4498@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 45d
Not every kind of damage is physical.
AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 45d
G-G-G-GHOSTS!!!!
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 45d
And?
tabarnaski@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 45d
You seem to be doing some sort of weird fear mongering... Can you elaborate on what you consider dangerous with AI?
yogthos@lemmy.ml · 15 pts · 46d
That's right, better make sure unaccountable corps of the turd reich are the only ones controlling this tech.
danc4498@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 46d
They should be regulated.
yogthos@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 46d
By whom?
danc4498@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 46d
Regulators
yogthos@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 46d
Do go on, from which country?
danc4498@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 45d
Oh, my dear boy, all of them should be regulating it.
yogthos@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 45d
well good luck with that kiddo, I'm sure it will be as effective as regulation of other types of open source
noli@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 46d
Knives are very dangerous, hence they are only alllowed in industrial kitchens.
danc4498@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 46d
Knives and AI are equivalent.
noli@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 46d
So is a glorified autocomplete and C4
danc4498@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 45d
Their point is that it is no longer a “glorified autocomplete”. And that’s where you misunderstand the entire point.
DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 45d
But it's really nothing more than a glorious auto correct. https://youtube.com/shorts/bsl46vGpMNU
danc4498@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 45d
A human brain is a glorified auto correct.
Fact is, the AI that is dangerous is not giving advice about how to get to a car wash. It’s building hacks and scams etc. At a level and scale we’ve never seen before.
I think the lesson that should be taken from this is not that we need to prevent open source AI from coming out. We should recognize that Anthropic is in control of weapons that should be regulated by the government more heavily than it is. And society as a whole should be preparing for the “mythos” style AI to be open sourced. Which is inevitable from the sounds of it.
DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 45d
We've had hacks and scams before. AI is just another tool making it easier than before to do it. Doing criminal acts are already illegal. Both with and without the use of AI.
I'm not sure how it could even be regulated. In my view it's probably too late for any societal regulation. AI is open source and anyone can host it at home. I wouldn't mind some regulation for corporations though.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 45d
So then we should all be banned from using it and only megacorps can??
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 45d
I don't see the difference, you can easily burn down your whole house with the stove, the fire can spread through the neighborhood. Yet, just about everyone has a stove. Local AI will be the same after a decade or so.
danc4498@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 45d
Their point is the damage you can do with AI will be significantly worse than burning a couple buildings down.
AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 45d
Yet to see a point yet that wasn't a nonspecific and unsupported declaration of fact