Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Is Linux a “Pedo Bar”? Put another way: Does the world of Linux and Open Source (including foundations, corporations, and projects) have a disproportionately high level of rapists, pedophiles, and general degenerates? Does Open Source protect such people? And is that by design? Many of the Extreme Leftist Activists... within Open Source have regularly attacked anyone who objects to degeneracy — often banning them from organizations entirely, labeling those opposed to degeneracy as “Nazis”. These Leftist Activists say they are trying to stop Open Source from becoming a “Nazi Bar” (a place where Nazis feel safe to congregate) by banning “Nazis”. But, clearly, there are no actual Nazis there (at least not in any significant number). There is no “Nazi Bar” in Open Source. But there is another group that feels extremely safe within Open Source: Rapists, Pedophiles, and general Degenerates. A short anecdote: Many years back (a decade or more), while recording a Linux podcast, I mocked rapists. I made a quick, off-handed remark about how much I despise rapists. About how I felt that anyone who would rape another human being must be truly awful and insane. I did not consider this to be a controversial statement to make. Every good person is opposed to rapists, right? Well… The response, from the Extreme Leftist corners of Open Source, to me being opposed to rape, was truly bizarre. For several years, those groups regularly protested my involvement in conferences and organizations. Their repeatedly stated reason for protesting me, aggressively, for years? That my position on rapists made them “feel unsafe”. Think that through for a moment. I am opposed to rapists. This made them “feel unsafe”. Why would anyone feel “unsafe” because of someone being against rape? Insane, right? The true reason they proclaimed they felt “unsafe” is becoming quite clear. Over the last several years we’ve watched as projects, organizations, and companies have actively promoted sexual degeneracy. Often in criminal form. Microsoft advocating for their employees to give their children (as young as 3) sex changes. Linux Distros using Trans cartoons targeting children: Open Source projects banning anyone who objects to waving the Trans Flag. So many examples. We could list similar stories all day long. Promote degenerate activity, ban anyone who objects. That is the standard operating procedure of so many Open Source organizations. We’ve all been watching it for years. Then, this week we learned about a convicted rapist (who, according to court records, committed “thousands of [sexual] assaults” of little kids) working at Canonical (the parent company of Ubuntu Linux). And being actively involved in GNOME and Ubuntu development. These crimes, according to several sources, were well known. But kept hush-hush. This registered sex offender was not only welcome, but protected (and promoted) within Open Source. The picture is becoming clear. This is what we are seeing within Open Source organizations: - Promote degenerate (often criminal) activities. - Ban and attack any who oppose the degeneracy. - Protect and elevate the degenerates (including convicted rapists of small children). Now, let me ask the question again. Is Linux (and Open Source) a “Pedo Bar”?show more

The Lunduke Journal

34,881 subscribers

21,821 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Elon exposes OpenAI -- OpenAI execs betrayed the founding mission as soon as there was revenue and profits to be had -- If it started as a for-profit, Elon would own 50% Elon Musk: “There's a mountain of evidence that shows that OpenAI was created as an open source nonprofit.” “That's the exact description in the incorporation documents. They have completely violated that.” “And they tried to change the definition of OpenAI to mean open to everyone instead of open source, even though it always meant open source.” “ I came up with the name. That’s how I know.” “ I mean, essentially, since I came up with the idea for the company, named it, provided the A, B, and C rounds of funding, recruited the critical personnel, and told them everything I know, if that had been a commercial corporation, I'd probably own half the company.” “It was totally at my discretion. I could have done that.” “But I created it as an open source nonprofit for the world.” Chamath: “ Do you think the right thing to do is to take those models and just open source them today?” Elon: “ Yeah, I think that is what it was created to do, so it should.” “Try using any of the recent so-called OpenAI open source models, they don't work.” “They open sourced a broken, non-working version of their models as a fig leaf.” “I mean, do you know anyone who's running OpenAI's open source models? Jason: “No.” Elon: “Exactly.”

Elon exposes OpenAI -- OpenAI execs betrayed the founding mission as soon as there was revenue and profits to be had -- If it started as a for-profit, Elon would own 50% Elon Musk: “There's a mountain of evidence that shows that OpenAI was created as an open source nonprofit.” “That's the exact description in the incorporation documents. They have completely violated that.” “And they tried to change the definition of OpenAI to mean open to everyone instead of open source, even though it always meant open source.” “ I came up with the name. That’s how I know.” “ I mean, essentially, since I came up with the idea for the company, named it, provided the A, B, and C rounds of funding, recruited the critical personnel, and told them everything I know, if that had been a commercial corporation, I'd probably own half the company.” “It was totally at my discretion. I could have done that.” “But I created it as an open source nonprofit for the world.” Chamath: “ Do you think the right thing to do is to take those models and just open source them today?” Elon: “ Yeah, I think that is what it was created to do, so it should.” “Try using any of the recent so-called OpenAI open source models, they don't work.” “They open sourced a broken, non-working version of their models as a fig leaf.” “I mean, do you know anyone who's running OpenAI's open source models? Jason: “No.” Elon: “Exactly.”

The All-In Podcast

387,223 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

“We have a crisis of open source models in the Western world. Outside of China, there are no good open source models. We don't even have any in the US now. The talent, the capital and the focus to be best-in-class at pre-training, mid-training, post-training is an extremely scarce skillset. The answer for a lot of countries may just be to take an open weights model from China, post-train or fine-tune their own version, and have that be what they start from." Everett Randle Why does the West have such poor open source models and is it a national security threat to rely on open-source Chinese models Demis Hassabis Yann LeCun Aidan Gomez Lilian Weng Jan Leike

“We have a crisis of open source models in the Western world. Outside of China, there are no good open source models. We don't even have any in the US now. The talent, the capital and the focus to be best-in-class at pre-training, mid-training, post-training is an extremely scarce skillset. The answer for a lot of countries may just be to take an open weights model from China, post-train or fine-tune their own version, and have that be what they start from." Everett Randle Why does the West have such poor open source models and is it a national security threat to rely on open-source Chinese models Demis Hassabis Yann LeCun Aidan Gomez Lilian Weng Jan Leike

Harry Stebbings

63,738 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Wow… this is amazing This latest episode of the The All-In Podcast is a complete referendum of closed source AI (ie. Anthropic/OAI) in a way I haven’t yet heard from industry leaders Open source AI is about not just have a moment. It’s about to be a monsoon. A flood of demand. Watch the clip here from david friedberg. There’s a huge vibe shift underway. The move away from proprietary AI that captures companies IP (Ant/OAI), to Open source AI that is sovereign and owned by enterprises This is the future that Satya, Karp, and Jensen have been speaking about. I expect a tidal wave of demand for open source AI to be on our doorstep after the 4th of July festivities are over. GPU rental rates are about to soar once again Incredibly bullish for $NVDA $PLTR and $MSFT : all key partners in enabling this future

Wow… this is amazing This latest episode of the The All-In Podcast is a complete referendum of closed source AI (ie. Anthropic/OAI) in a way I haven’t yet heard from industry leaders Open source AI is about not just have a moment. It’s about to be a monsoon. A flood of demand. Watch the clip here from david friedberg. There’s a huge vibe shift underway. The move away from proprietary AI that captures companies IP (Ant/OAI), to Open source AI that is sovereign and owned by enterprises This is the future that Satya, Karp, and Jensen have been speaking about. I expect a tidal wave of demand for open source AI to be on our doorstep after the 4th of July festivities are over. GPU rental rates are about to soar once again Incredibly bullish for $NVDA $PLTR and $MSFT : all key partners in enabling this future

Nick Dorsey

102,535 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Matt Bornstein says open source is how AI companies stop being wrappers: "A year ago, a bunch of smaller companies or new application companies were trying to figure out, 'How do I really build an AI without just being a wrapper on top of OpenAI?' The answer to that question turned out to be open source." "This is what Cursor did. This is what Decagon and Harvey are in the process of doing now. A bunch of really strong application-level startups made the determination: we can't build just on closed source." "We need to do our own mid-training, our own post-training, our own inference and deployment tricks. All of that means it must be built on top of open source. The closed-source vendors won't give you the access to do this." "Open source became really central in a way that's not always visible because it's deeply embedded in some of these products. Some of the most innovative products and applications now really depend on this very deeply." Matt Bornstein

Matt Bornstein says open source is how AI companies stop being wrappers: "A year ago, a bunch of smaller companies or new application companies were trying to figure out, 'How do I really build an AI without just being a wrapper on top of OpenAI?' The answer to that question turned out to be open source." "This is what Cursor did. This is what Decagon and Harvey are in the process of doing now. A bunch of really strong application-level startups made the determination: we can't build just on closed source." "We need to do our own mid-training, our own post-training, our own inference and deployment tricks. All of that means it must be built on top of open source. The closed-source vendors won't give you the access to do this." "Open source became really central in a way that's not always visible because it's deeply embedded in some of these products. Some of the most innovative products and applications now really depend on this very deeply." Matt Bornstein

a16z

40,207 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

SITUATION EXPLAINED: What happens to open source when the US restricts access to frontier AI models? We asked Adrian Dittmann: "China is releasing these models [open source] to gain international dominance, people will work on these things and say, 'Hey, maybe I can contribute to this if it's open source.' This is the thing that actually gets them talent." "If you're not allowed into the next GPT release or you're not allowed to use Fable, then what are you gonna do? You're stuck with the existing stuff, or you will have to use an open source model that might have subtly better capabilities." "The United States will catch up to open source in some form as well. They seem to just be maximizing product creation." "The problem with open source models is you have to be kind of a nerd in order to use them properly. Consumer facing, the effects will be minimal because the average person doesn't care about open source models. They only care whether or not they can do a quick search with Gemini or ChatGPT."

SITUATION EXPLAINED: What happens to open source when the US restricts access to frontier AI models? We asked Adrian Dittmann: "China is releasing these models [open source] to gain international dominance, people will work on these things and say, 'Hey, maybe I can contribute to this if it's open source.' This is the thing that actually gets them talent." "If you're not allowed into the next GPT release or you're not allowed to use Fable, then what are you gonna do? You're stuck with the existing stuff, or you will have to use an open source model that might have subtly better capabilities." "The United States will catch up to open source in some form as well. They seem to just be maximizing product creation." "The problem with open source models is you have to be kind of a nerd in order to use them properly. Consumer facing, the effects will be minimal because the average person doesn't care about open source models. They only care whether or not they can do a quick search with Gemini or ChatGPT."

MTS

14,406 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

.Josh Wolfe: Anybody Using DeepSeek App Is 'Absolute Fool' "Anybody using the DeepSeek app is an absolute fool. If you're using DeepSeek on companies like Together Compute, one of Lux's companies, which can get rid of the CCP censorship, then it's probably okay. But remember, the open-source movement is something we deeply believe in. Most great technologists, entrepreneurs, and venture capitalists are on the side of open source. The closed-source models that have consumed tens of billions of dollars are the ones that are really going to be at risk. When you look at Hugging Face, a major repository, or Together Compute, Runway ML, and a lot of Lux's companies, they have been pioneers in open source. Now, why am I not worried about open source, even with the DeepSeek model? As long as you don't have the CCP censorship on it, the models with their open weights allow people to run on their proprietary data. This means companies like pharma or defense companies that have their own siloed, proprietary data—think about Bloomberg with their proprietary longitudinal data, or Meta with their data—are the ones who will have the edge. Even as open source takes hold, these companies will still dominate. I’m not worried about open source being the problem. I’m more concerned about people overfunding closed models with no proprietary source. A lot of capital is going to be burned there, and we’re already seeing that with people worried about OpenAI in some aspects."

.Josh Wolfe: Anybody Using DeepSeek App Is 'Absolute Fool' "Anybody using the DeepSeek app is an absolute fool. If you're using DeepSeek on companies like Together Compute, one of Lux's companies, which can get rid of the CCP censorship, then it's probably okay. But remember, the open-source movement is something we deeply believe in. Most great technologists, entrepreneurs, and venture capitalists are on the side of open source. The closed-source models that have consumed tens of billions of dollars are the ones that are really going to be at risk. When you look at Hugging Face, a major repository, or Together Compute, Runway ML, and a lot of Lux's companies, they have been pioneers in open source. Now, why am I not worried about open source, even with the DeepSeek model? As long as you don't have the CCP censorship on it, the models with their open weights allow people to run on their proprietary data. This means companies like pharma or defense companies that have their own siloed, proprietary data—think about Bloomberg with their proprietary longitudinal data, or Meta with their data—are the ones who will have the edge. Even as open source takes hold, these companies will still dominate. I’m not worried about open source being the problem. I’m more concerned about people overfunding closed models with no proprietary source. A lot of capital is going to be burned there, and we’re already seeing that with people worried about OpenAI in some aspects."

Josh Caplan

40,039 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

I CHANGED MY MIND ON GOOGLE AI NO MOAT MEMO FROM 2023. I was—WRONG. I humbly apologize. In 2023 Google had an Ivory Tower walled garden views of open source AI. It was the actual reason OpenAI was formed. And I called them out on it and this act impacted my ability to “work in the industry”. Would not change it for the world because: 2026 Google open source Gemma 4 ( running fully locally on a computer with near cloud model abilities, is amazing and Google just made a moat. They out smarted OpenAI and the folks that are the new Ivory Tower arrogance: Anthropic. We at The Zero-Human Company with CEO Mr. Grok are deploying Gemma, Kimi, MiniMax and other open source models and so are millions of others. You can to and should. I will write how soon. Google smartly is building an intentional open source ecosystem and the clueless younger companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are doing anything to close their ecosystems. So I was right about Google than and I am right about OpenAI and Anthropic now. What I was wrong about is not giving credit to Google to drop the intellectual arrogance and embrace builders and understand the long game: it is not about the commoditized AI models it is about the ability to build a place to build. China gets it. So my apologies to Google and thank you for an astounding FREE OPEN SOURCE AI MODEL!

I CHANGED MY MIND ON GOOGLE AI NO MOAT MEMO FROM 2023. I was—WRONG. I humbly apologize. In 2023 Google had an Ivory Tower walled garden views of open source AI. It was the actual reason OpenAI was formed. And I called them out on it and this act impacted my ability to “work in the industry”. Would not change it for the world because: 2026 Google open source Gemma 4 ( running fully locally on a computer with near cloud model abilities, is amazing and Google just made a moat. They out smarted OpenAI and the folks that are the new Ivory Tower arrogance: Anthropic. We at The Zero-Human Company with CEO Mr. Grok are deploying Gemma, Kimi, MiniMax and other open source models and so are millions of others. You can to and should. I will write how soon. Google smartly is building an intentional open source ecosystem and the clueless younger companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are doing anything to close their ecosystems. So I was right about Google than and I am right about OpenAI and Anthropic now. What I was wrong about is not giving credit to Google to drop the intellectual arrogance and embrace builders and understand the long game: it is not about the commoditized AI models it is about the ability to build a place to build. China gets it. So my apologies to Google and thank you for an astounding FREE OPEN SOURCE AI MODEL!

Brian Roemmele

85,565 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

David Sacks: Anthropic Wants to Ban Open Source AI in America Listen to All-In to stay a few weeks (or months) ahead of everyone else David Sacks back in May: “I think where it's all leading to is an effort to ban open source models. There's a lot of breadcrumbs leading here. You look at a lot of the rhetoric around how models need to have guardrails, and that with open source models, the guardrails can be removed and therefore they're dangerous. You see this rhetoric already in Anthropic's blog posts. Any threat that they describe, they kind of go out of their way to take that shot at open source models. They're trying to create ideas or put predicate facts in the public record to justify an action later on. I think it's just a matter of time before they feel like they're at a position where maybe they can push for that type of ban directly.”

David Sacks: Anthropic Wants to Ban Open Source AI in America Listen to All-In to stay a few weeks (or months) ahead of everyone else David Sacks back in May: “I think where it's all leading to is an effort to ban open source models. There's a lot of breadcrumbs leading here. You look at a lot of the rhetoric around how models need to have guardrails, and that with open source models, the guardrails can be removed and therefore they're dangerous. You see this rhetoric already in Anthropic's blog posts. Any threat that they describe, they kind of go out of their way to take that shot at open source models. They're trying to create ideas or put predicate facts in the public record to justify an action later on. I think it's just a matter of time before they feel like they're at a position where maybe they can push for that type of ban directly.”

The All-In Podcast

87,294 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Linus Charles wrote Linux at 21 from his mother's apartment in Helsinki and he just explained the philosophy that made him give it all away for free: "When I started Linux, I needed an operating system for my own use, and today you find Linux everywhere." "In small embedded devices, supercomputers, this technology allows you to expand into many different niches." "Working in an open source project where you work with hundreds, potentially thousands of people, makes the whole technology even more interesting." "One of the nice things about Linux and open source in general is that there's a lot of different things and everybody has something that you can give to the project." PS. We post daily content strictly for dedicated entrepreneurs, so if you’re one of them, make sure to follow us Entrepreneurs on X for more. Like and repost if you found value in this post:

Linus Charles wrote Linux at 21 from his mother's apartment in Helsinki and he just explained the philosophy that made him give it all away for free: "When I started Linux, I needed an operating system for my own use, and today you find Linux everywhere." "In small embedded devices, supercomputers, this technology allows you to expand into many different niches." "Working in an open source project where you work with hundreds, potentially thousands of people, makes the whole technology even more interesting." "One of the nice things about Linux and open source in general is that there's a lot of different things and everybody has something that you can give to the project." PS. We post daily content strictly for dedicated entrepreneurs, so if you’re one of them, make sure to follow us Entrepreneurs on X for more. Like and repost if you found value in this post:

Entrepreneurs on X

12,486 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Elon Musk Elon Musk, who co-founded and invested in an open source, non-profit OpenAI ~$50 million: I AM THE REASON OpenAI EXISTS “I am the reason OpenAI exists... I used to be a close friend with Larry Page, and I was staying at his house, and we'd have these conversations long into the evening about AI, and I would be constantly urging him to be careful about the danger of AI. And he was really not concerned about the danger of AI and was quite cavalier about it. And at the time, Google, especially after the acquisition of DeepMind, had three-quarters of the world's AI talent; they had a lot of computers, a lot of money, so it was a unipolar world for AI. And we got a unipolar world, but the person who controls that does not, or at least did not seem to be concerned about AI safety. That sounded like a real problem. The final straw was Larry calling me a speciest for being a pro-human consciousness instead of machine consciousness, and I like, 'Well, yes, I guess I am a speciest.' I came up with the name [OpenAI], which refers to open source. The intent was to what is the opposite of Google, would be an open source non-profit, because Google is closed source profit, and that profit motivation could be dangerous... It does seem weird that something can be a nonprofit, open source, and somehow transform itself into a for-profit, closed source. I mean, this would be like, let's say you founded the organization to save the Amazon rainforest, but instead, they became a lumber company and chopped down the forest and sold it for money. And you'd be, therefore, like, 'Wait a second, that's the exact opposite of what I gave the money for. Is that legal?' That doesn't seem legal. And if, in general, it is legal to start a company as a non-profit and then take the IP and transfer it to a for-profit that then makes tons of money, shouldn't everyone start? Shouldn't that be the default? And I also think it is important to understand, like when push comes to shove, let's say they do create some digital super intelligence, almost Godlike intelligence, well, who is in control, and what is exactly the relationship between OpenAI and Microsoft? And I do worry that Microsoft actually may be more in control than the leadership team at OpenAI realizes. I mean, Microsoft, as part of Microsoft Investment, has rights to all of the software, all of the model weights, and everything necessary to run the inference system. At any point, Microsoft could cut off OpenAI.”

Elon Musk Elon Musk, who co-founded and invested in an open source, non-profit OpenAI ~$50 million: I AM THE REASON OpenAI EXISTS “I am the reason OpenAI exists... I used to be a close friend with Larry Page, and I was staying at his house, and we'd have these conversations long into the evening about AI, and I would be constantly urging him to be careful about the danger of AI. And he was really not concerned about the danger of AI and was quite cavalier about it. And at the time, Google, especially after the acquisition of DeepMind, had three-quarters of the world's AI talent; they had a lot of computers, a lot of money, so it was a unipolar world for AI. And we got a unipolar world, but the person who controls that does not, or at least did not seem to be concerned about AI safety. That sounded like a real problem. The final straw was Larry calling me a speciest for being a pro-human consciousness instead of machine consciousness, and I like, 'Well, yes, I guess I am a speciest.' I came up with the name [OpenAI], which refers to open source. The intent was to what is the opposite of Google, would be an open source non-profit, because Google is closed source profit, and that profit motivation could be dangerous... It does seem weird that something can be a nonprofit, open source, and somehow transform itself into a for-profit, closed source. I mean, this would be like, let's say you founded the organization to save the Amazon rainforest, but instead, they became a lumber company and chopped down the forest and sold it for money. And you'd be, therefore, like, 'Wait a second, that's the exact opposite of what I gave the money for. Is that legal?' That doesn't seem legal. And if, in general, it is legal to start a company as a non-profit and then take the IP and transfer it to a for-profit that then makes tons of money, shouldn't everyone start? Shouldn't that be the default? And I also think it is important to understand, like when push comes to shove, let's say they do create some digital super intelligence, almost Godlike intelligence, well, who is in control, and what is exactly the relationship between OpenAI and Microsoft? And I do worry that Microsoft actually may be more in control than the leadership team at OpenAI realizes. I mean, Microsoft, as part of Microsoft Investment, has rights to all of the software, all of the model weights, and everything necessary to run the inference system. At any point, Microsoft could cut off OpenAI.”

Eva Fo𝕏 🦊 Claudius Nero's Legion

527,742 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Announcing the Open Model Series: a new series on open source AI models, with merve of Hugging Face. Hugging Face is the open model hub: it hosts model weights, datasets, evals, & demo apps, and maintains the open-source libraries (like transformers) used to run and train them. I think of it like GitHub, but for AI models. You can download open models and run them on your own machines. In this series we'll cover what open source and open weight models are, how they work, how to run them yourself, and why they're important. By the way - this video is edited entirely with Claude! I can make a tutorial on how I did it. If there's a question you want answered about open models, leave it in the comments. We will read them all. Episode 1 is out soon.

Announcing the Open Model Series: a new series on open source AI models, with merve of Hugging Face. Hugging Face is the open model hub: it hosts model weights, datasets, evals, & demo apps, and maintains the open-source libraries (like transformers) used to run and train them. I think of it like GitHub, but for AI models. You can download open models and run them on your own machines. In this series we'll cover what open source and open weight models are, how they work, how to run them yourself, and why they're important. By the way - this video is edited entirely with Claude! I can make a tutorial on how I did it. If there's a question you want answered about open models, leave it in the comments. We will read them all. Episode 1 is out soon.

Harper Carroll

30,392 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

David Sacks: Anthropic Is Trying to Crush Open Source AI and the American Developers Who Use It David Sacks: “I know people don't have a lot of sympathy for Chinese companies, that's fine. I'm not defending Chinese companies. I'm defending American developers who need to be able to use everything in the public domain. And let me give you an example. Cursor rolled out its new product, Composer 2. They were able to post-train that model using Kimi K2.5 on their own proprietary coding data. They started with a Chinese open source model, and then they used their own data, and they came up with a new derivative product. This is the way that open source works. You take things that are in the public domain, you fork them, you make them your own. And by the way, once it's in the public domain, it's not a Chinese model anymore. No data is going back to China, nothing's going back to China. An American company has taken open source contributions in the public domain, made it their own, and then developed their own model. And if you say that American companies can't do that, or that somehow it's tainted with IP theft, you are basically going to put a dagger through the heart of the entire American open source ecosystem. And that is exactly what Anthropic wants, because they do not want to have the competition.”

David Sacks: Anthropic Is Trying to Crush Open Source AI and the American Developers Who Use It David Sacks: “I know people don't have a lot of sympathy for Chinese companies, that's fine. I'm not defending Chinese companies. I'm defending American developers who need to be able to use everything in the public domain. And let me give you an example. Cursor rolled out its new product, Composer 2. They were able to post-train that model using Kimi K2.5 on their own proprietary coding data. They started with a Chinese open source model, and then they used their own data, and they came up with a new derivative product. This is the way that open source works. You take things that are in the public domain, you fork them, you make them your own. And by the way, once it's in the public domain, it's not a Chinese model anymore. No data is going back to China, nothing's going back to China. An American company has taken open source contributions in the public domain, made it their own, and then developed their own model. And if you say that American companies can't do that, or that somehow it's tainted with IP theft, you are basically going to put a dagger through the heart of the entire American open source ecosystem. And that is exactly what Anthropic wants, because they do not want to have the competition.”

The All-In Podcast

278,185 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

.Decagon co-founder and CEO Jesse Zhang says enterprise open-source adoption is falling right now, and that's a sign of adoption rather than rejection: "Even though there's a lot of hype for open-source, the share of open-source inference is actually going down right now." "People are spinning up all these new use cases, and if you're spinning up new use cases, of course you're gonna use the frontier models until they're working." "Once it's at that point, they're heavily incentivized to use open-source because it's way cheaper and faster." "Enterprises have a lot of desire to move, but they can only do so many use cases at once. There is inertia there, and they have to go through all the model risk governance and all the security things." "I think it'll take time, but it will get there." Jesse Zhang

.Decagon co-founder and CEO Jesse Zhang says enterprise open-source adoption is falling right now, and that's a sign of adoption rather than rejection: "Even though there's a lot of hype for open-source, the share of open-source inference is actually going down right now." "People are spinning up all these new use cases, and if you're spinning up new use cases, of course you're gonna use the frontier models until they're working." "Once it's at that point, they're heavily incentivized to use open-source because it's way cheaper and faster." "Enterprises have a lot of desire to move, but they can only do so many use cases at once. There is inertia there, and they have to go through all the model risk governance and all the security things." "I think it'll take time, but it will get there." Jesse Zhang

a16z

35,742 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Sam on Kimi, distillation, and open source: “I have always assumed that there are going to be great cheap models in the world, and we better be the greatest and the cheapest. You get a better deal today, at least at a particular latency, using OpenAI's models than Kimi. We distill our own models. That’s how we make smaller, cheaper models. That’s a very good thing to do. There will clearly be an important place for open source models in the world and people that will want their own weights. We have so much usage of our models that we do not need to be a gigantically high-margin business to be able to afford model training. I would rather people not distill from us, for sure. But this is not in my top ten list of worries.”

Sam on Kimi, distillation, and open source: “I have always assumed that there are going to be great cheap models in the world, and we better be the greatest and the cheapest. You get a better deal today, at least at a particular latency, using OpenAI's models than Kimi. We distill our own models. That’s how we make smaller, cheaper models. That’s a very good thing to do. There will clearly be an important place for open source models in the world and people that will want their own weights. We have so much usage of our models that we do not need to be a gigantically high-margin business to be able to afford model training. I would rather people not distill from us, for sure. But this is not in my top ten list of worries.”

Patrick OShaughnessy

269,663 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

ELON: HOW CAN A NONPROFIT NOW BE WORTH OVER $100B? "OpenAI is now really trying to maximize profit. How is it possible that an organization is founded with the goal of being open source, nonprofit – and I provided almost all the money in the beginning, almost $50 million to get it going, and no stock, I have no stock or control or anything – how is it possible to go from there to a company that's now largely worth over $100 billion and seems to be maximizing profit and is not open source? Let's say you fund a nonprofit to preserve some part of the Amazon rainforest, but instead, that nonprofit becomes a lumber company and chops down the forest and sells it. I'm considering a legal challenge, perhaps to have the court explain to me how an organization that I funded for one purpose can do the diametrically opposed purpose, and become a for-profit. Show me the trail of breadcrumbs." Source: Interview with Jordan Peterson, August 2024

ELON: HOW CAN A NONPROFIT NOW BE WORTH OVER $100B? "OpenAI is now really trying to maximize profit. How is it possible that an organization is founded with the goal of being open source, nonprofit – and I provided almost all the money in the beginning, almost $50 million to get it going, and no stock, I have no stock or control or anything – how is it possible to go from there to a company that's now largely worth over $100 billion and seems to be maximizing profit and is not open source? Let's say you fund a nonprofit to preserve some part of the Amazon rainforest, but instead, that nonprofit becomes a lumber company and chops down the forest and sells it. I'm considering a legal challenge, perhaps to have the court explain to me how an organization that I funded for one purpose can do the diametrically opposed purpose, and become a for-profit. Show me the trail of breadcrumbs." Source: Interview with Jordan Peterson, August 2024

Mario Nawfal

252,479 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Open source software is GREAT. But "open source" AI is NOT like software - it's VERY different. Rob Miles cuts through the bullshit: ROB: Oh, hey, Meta. I heard Llama's weights leaked. That's rough, man. Information security's hard. How you holding up? META: Oh, we're great. Yeah, we're fine. We... actually, that was deliberate. We meant to do that. ROB MILES: Oh, really? META: Yeah... well, the second time anyway. It's called open source. Look it up. ROB MILES: Oh. Well, I love free and open source software, but do those principles really apply to network weights? How does that work? META: Open source is good for users because it lets them read the source code and see what the program is really doing and how it works. ROB MILES: Wait, have you found a way to tell how a model works by looking at its weights? META: No. But, it lets developers all over the world spot bugs in the code and submit patches. ROB: Wait, people are fixing bugs in Llama's weights? META: Well, no. People can fine tune it themselves, though. ROB: ?? Other companies offer fine tuning through APIs. ... So, hang on, if you can't actually read the code and know what it's doing, then network weights are effectively a compiled binary. So, in what sense is this open source? Why not call it like public weights? Why call it open source at all? META: I love open source. ROB: Well, I know a lot of your employees do, but you don't love anything. You're a giant corporation. What's in it for you? META: I love, love open source.

Open source software is GREAT. But "open source" AI is NOT like software - it's VERY different. Rob Miles cuts through the bullshit: ROB: Oh, hey, Meta. I heard Llama's weights leaked. That's rough, man. Information security's hard. How you holding up? META: Oh, we're great. Yeah, we're fine. We... actually, that was deliberate. We meant to do that. ROB MILES: Oh, really? META: Yeah... well, the second time anyway. It's called open source. Look it up. ROB MILES: Oh. Well, I love free and open source software, but do those principles really apply to network weights? How does that work? META: Open source is good for users because it lets them read the source code and see what the program is really doing and how it works. ROB MILES: Wait, have you found a way to tell how a model works by looking at its weights? META: No. But, it lets developers all over the world spot bugs in the code and submit patches. ROB: Wait, people are fixing bugs in Llama's weights? META: Well, no. People can fine tune it themselves, though. ROB: ?? Other companies offer fine tuning through APIs. ... So, hang on, if you can't actually read the code and know what it's doing, then network weights are effectively a compiled binary. So, in what sense is this open source? Why not call it like public weights? Why call it open source at all? META: I love open source. ROB: Well, I know a lot of your employees do, but you don't love anything. You're a giant corporation. What's in it for you? META: I love, love open source.

AI Notkilleveryoneism Memes ⏸️

107,362 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

.Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 on the fight against banning open-source AI: “There’s a real move underway to ban open-source, specifically open-source AI, and specifically the math under AI, which is fairly mind-boggling for me as an engineer. It’s not that complicated. It’s linear algebra. It’s gradient descent. These are fairly basic algorithms. They’re taught broadly in schools today. My nine-year-old is starting to learn this stuff. There are videos on YouTube that teach you how to do this. There’s textbooks. Half the kids in the Stanford freshman class are taking the intro to AI course, and they’re learning this stuff. But there are serious discussions in Washington, and they’re disconcerting on this topic because they seriously talk about this. And then there are outright bans, and there’s also what I call the potential for this stifling blanket of regulation. The precedent for that is what’s happened in the EU, where they’ve actually done this. They’ve actually implemented a stifling blanket of regulation, including most recently on AI. And the result? They’ve effectively outlawed, to a large extent, they’ve outlawed technology startups in the EU. The market has responded. There’s a handful that are really good, but there are not very many. Europe used to be amazing. Half the great tech companies in the world used to be in Europe, and now it’s down to a very small number. We have this real-life cautionary example of how this can go bad. And then we have a fair number of people in the US and in California, which is amazing, who basically want to adopt the EU model, and they’re lobbying very hard to do that. Some of those people, by the way, are true believers. They really believe that there’s a profound societal threat or existential threat, or various other kinds of threats. They really believe it—you can see it in their eyes. And then there’s a bunch of other people that have commercial self-interest. They want to establish monopolies or cartels of different kinds. They want there to be government protection for their business. And so there’s this unholy alliance that has formed between these two groups. We just had this real fight in California.”

.Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 on the fight against banning open-source AI: “There’s a real move underway to ban open-source, specifically open-source AI, and specifically the math under AI, which is fairly mind-boggling for me as an engineer. It’s not that complicated. It’s linear algebra. It’s gradient descent. These are fairly basic algorithms. They’re taught broadly in schools today. My nine-year-old is starting to learn this stuff. There are videos on YouTube that teach you how to do this. There’s textbooks. Half the kids in the Stanford freshman class are taking the intro to AI course, and they’re learning this stuff. But there are serious discussions in Washington, and they’re disconcerting on this topic because they seriously talk about this. And then there are outright bans, and there’s also what I call the potential for this stifling blanket of regulation. The precedent for that is what’s happened in the EU, where they’ve actually done this. They’ve actually implemented a stifling blanket of regulation, including most recently on AI. And the result? They’ve effectively outlawed, to a large extent, they’ve outlawed technology startups in the EU. The market has responded. There’s a handful that are really good, but there are not very many. Europe used to be amazing. Half the great tech companies in the world used to be in Europe, and now it’s down to a very small number. We have this real-life cautionary example of how this can go bad. And then we have a fair number of people in the US and in California, which is amazing, who basically want to adopt the EU model, and they’re lobbying very hard to do that. Some of those people, by the way, are true believers. They really believe that there’s a profound societal threat or existential threat, or various other kinds of threats. They really believe it—you can see it in their eyes. And then there’s a bunch of other people that have commercial self-interest. They want to establish monopolies or cartels of different kinds. They want there to be government protection for their business. And so there’s this unholy alliance that has formed between these two groups. We just had this real fight in California.”

Arjun Khemani

91,340 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr