News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047. Parent comment

Re:Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047 by SonOfLilit on Sunday September 29, 2024 @06:52PM (#41691553)
So if it's not them, who is the hidden commercial interest sponsoring an attack on open source models that cost >$100mm to train? Or does Wiener just genuinely hate megabudget open source? Or is it an accidental attack, aimed at something else? At what?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047 by worstspotgain on Sunday September 29, 2024 @06:58PM (#41691601)
Like I said, supporters included wary copyright holders and the bottom-market also-rans like Musk. If your model is barely holding up against Llama, what's the point of staying in.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047 by SonOfLilit on Sunday September 29, 2024 @07:04PM (#41691654)
And two of the three godfathers of AI, and all of the AI notkillaboutism crowd.

Actually, wait, if Grok is losing to GPT, why would Musk care about Llama more than Altman? Llama hurts his competitor...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047 by worstspotgain on Sunday September 29, 2024 @07:29PM (#41691841)
The market in my argument looks like OpenAI ~ Anthropic > Google >>> Meta (~ or maybe >) Musk/Alibaba. The top 3 aren't worried about the down-market stuff. You're free to disagree of course.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047 by ascorbic on Tuesday October 01, 2024 @02:17AM (#41705140)
He can't compete with Anthropic and OpenAI because their models are much better. Llama is the competitor with the capability closest to Grok.
[ Parent | on HN ]