Matl

Apple is absolutely doing this for apps that they think are worth copying, there's no morals there.

Problem is, OpenAI is maintaining a (slight) edge over DS seemingly only by being extremely inefficient.

I think most haven't put in the effort yet, but it is rather possible to make it extremely inconvenient where even if you get around the blocks, the experience will be extremely slow, random disconnects, non existent upload bandwidth so you could consume but not publish much etc.

They're very good at 'adjusting' revenue, who knows what the actual truth is.

Actually, farmers owning other businesses that use farm produce as input is not super uncommon.

> It won't trickle down to the directors' salaries, so then there's no reason for them to act any differently in future

Not only that but this kind of behaviour is actively seen as necessary by them to maximize profits. Maximizing profits is in turn what shareholders want so everyone involved is going to continue doing this.

I am of course eager to pay needlessly more to support poor Anthropic/OpenAI.

Open weight Chinese models are first and foremost a threat to the US companies producing closed models and because the US government is bought and paid for by the very same corporations, it tries to make the usage of open models within the US icky and this is an attempt to give that some authority.

Of course we in Europe should completely trust fully closed US models, otherwise tariffs/sanctions will ensure.

I find it funny how many of the comments are open weights != open source.

As compared to what? Fully closed U.S. models?

> We don't hold individuals inside big companies criminally liable for actions the company takes, or even that they take on behalf of the company.

So the leadership of Enron, FTX or Theranos were not liable for the actions their company took?

As an employee of a company, you can be held liable for the actions you oversaw in pretty much all Western countries. It has to be proven fraud, insider trading etc. not an ugly PowerPoint of course.

How about leadership of construction companies that were found to be violating safety standards or owners of establishments not following fire safety standards?

> Telling someone to do a bad job isn't criminal

No, but we're talking about telling someone to do a job that you know will likely result in criminal activity or may do so with high probability due to inadequate safeguards.

I suggest you stop quipping and start reading, who knows maybe OpenAI will eventually hire you.

Good to know, thanks for clarifying.

I'd start with fines. But if they continue with this I don't see why it couldn't result in jail time for multiple people. The biggest responsibility is of course with the CEO and C suite. They are ultimately responsible for what the ship does.

Of course then there's the question of why was such a leaky harness and sandbox used, in what way was it tested/not tested, did the model used have the usual 'hacking' safeguards that the public models do and if not, who made the call to use an unconstrained model and a harness with seemingly unlimited permissions and who approved it?

This can all be investigated and we can get to the bottom of who exactly needs to be held accountable in what way, be it I think if you start with fines the harnesses, sandboxes and models would stop doing this magically overnight.

Isn't it curious that none of these rouge agents booked a 5 star hotel for every OpenAI employee for a year on Sam Altman's credit card yet for example?

> So your position is that in the past the government mistreated various individuals thus you also want the government to mistreat openai employees today?

The hackers of the past often did it for curiosity without a profit motive. OpenAI is a for profit multi billion dollar corporation doing this for a profit motive so yes they should face consequences.

These incidents are not unexpected in the way OpenAI frames it either. Isn't it curious my agents are not wrecking havoc around the internet? It's because the harness I am using prevents them doing so and because I don't train and instruct them to do so.

OpenAI is using a set of non-constrained models, (unlike what the public gets) and a set of harnesses with extremely wide permissions running inside extremely leaky sandboxes using models trained on finding and executing exploits. This is not an accident. Certainly not by this point.

Nobody is talking about jailing OpenAI employees at this stage, usually corporations of this sort are fined. If they were fined for these 'misalignment' incidents, suddenly their sandboxes and generally lax approach would improve overnight.

Otherwise they'll continue doing this because they know Cyberdyne Systems didn't have a shortage of investors.

I feel like you can't compare deterministic tools to non-deterministic ones so not a great analogy.

Z.ai does offer access to DS AFAIK, so I guess that's what they mean? Maybe the feeling is that it provides more value that DS's own platform since you also get GLM, not sure.

Plenty of hackers were locked up who did altogether not that much damage too, the reason why people are upset is because it feels like OpenAI is laughing in our faces, basically saying they're above the law, while using this as a marketing campaign to pump up their upcoming IPO.

While great in theory, the flip side is all the slop patches and PRs that both the kernel and open source in general now has to deal with, often with only agents as responders.

It honestly doesn't want to make me open anything for outside contributions anymore.

Why? Total Commander for Android is a thing.

Sure, you can always slice it in a way to make it look like a democracy. There's elections within the Politburo too, or Iran, which is a Republic after all. It was true of South Africa too.

I am happy to call Israel an ethno-supremacist, apartheid democracy if you want.

> Agree this is tragic. But again, historically not unique.

Sure, the Holocaust was 'historically not unique' too. Aren't we meant to be moving forward as humanity? Slavery was legal for most of history too.

Given Blow likes to smear everyone and everything that's not him or his twin I don't feel particularly sorry for him.

> Most democracies also prohibit children and non-citizens from voting

In the case of Israel these 'non-citizens' are under brutal military occupation where each day Israel steals more and more of their land. There's no 'home country' they could return to because Israel is occupying it. They're not illegal immigrants. They ARE home and yet being treated by Israel like invaders.

Not super familiar with NVidia's numbering scheme but I see 615.78.08 in the repos, presumably newer than 595?

1 - https://packages.cachyos.org/package/cachyos-extra-v3/x86_64...

Difference being we're pretending that Israel is a democracy that values human rights, so nobody makes a real stink about it, unlike with China.

It's the same skill set, many acquire it via the IDF, so unsurprising.

Arch is great, but stick with stock or go for CachyOS, which prioritizes modern compiler optimizations and speed. Omarchy is DHH's vibecoded slop and I'd stay all clear of it.

My question is what do you connect this TO that doesn't spy. I get you can use a Smart TV and switch to HDMI input but there's no guarantee the TV is not spying on you in some way, if not today then tomorrow these things will come with eSIM support to upload ACR data even when 'disconnected' or connect to your smartphone over some ad tech protocol to do the same.

> CEO acts like a child

Applies to most of them.

I think the point is if there's some law in a given country i.e. banning model exports etc. it doesn't matter how many competitors within a single country there are.

I think that's fair. On the other hand whereas previously when you wanted to i.e. write software you HAD to learn something, now you don't. It could be that those who want to know will still want to know but it may also be that the knowledge becomes less desirable since it's not as valued any more.

> Does AI have the effect of tutors or textbooks, or something else?

With tutors or textbooks the explicit goal is to transfer their knowledge to you. With AI agents the goal is presumably to get things done and if you are happy with the results without wanting to understand how the thing you instructed the agent to do works, there's no knowledge transfer there.