Hacker News Reader

Comment by NooneAtAll3 | Hacker News Reader

"government needs to step in and regulate ai"

"wait, not like that"

Anth/OpenAI simply wanted the government to pull the ladder after them and ban models from China.

Seems it blew in their faces and probably the new frontier models will be available only to a select few. Many people predicted this, only a naive person would believe that access to something with these capabilities would be decided by some dude in California.

As entertaining as the sheer Schadenfreude of the situation is, this is terrible for foreign peasants like myself. It no longer makes any sense to pay for America's frontier AI models. I'd be funding the training of models I will never be able to use.

GLM 5.2 is competitive with Opus 4.6. If the best model I'll ever get is Opus 4.8, then the choice is clear. I'll miss Opus.

The geopolitical angle of all of this is interesting. Will countries, especially bigger players really just hope they'll get access to something so crucial from the US or China?

Probably the EU could pool together funds to create something competitive as being on the mercy of someone else isn't a pleasant place to be.

And I wouldn't get so used to the open models. Eventually, if they get good enough, the access to them will also get restricted.

The plan is to buy hardware before that can happen.

Yes, to the surprise of some HNers, regulations can be good or bad. Just because there are people unhappy with current regulation doesn't automatically mean regulation shouldn't exist at all.

BTW this isn't an opinion on the availability of GPT 5.6. I couldn't care less about that.

Usually this format of quip is meant to imply hypocrisy, but that doesn't apply here, so I don't know what you're implying.

It's also more typical of a Reddit or YouTube comment, rather than HN, but that's a separate issue.

Classical case of "be careful what you wish for".

Imagine if someone was lobbying for some reasonable regulation (we should regulate drugs, based around clinical trials) and then instead of a transparent system you get purely executive actions with little to no public justification (Trump declares all glp1s illegal no one knows why exactly)

Would you levy the same two quote criticism of the reasonable call for regulation?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com