[utilize1808]

The government will just claim that unsanctioned models have the potential to deliberately introduce security vulnerabilities when working on IT projects (e.g. be trained to strongly yet covertly favoring introducing compromised dependencies when you are not looking).

Then laws will be made to forbid organizations who use models other than those from the sanctioned labs to participate in critical projects on national security concerns.

All of a sudden, no business would risk using open source models anymore.

[pixelpoet]

Then all they do is drive the usage of open models underground (copyright infringement is illegal too, and still common), stifle US companies operating legally, and accelerate the rest of the world decoupling from the US.

I hope they do it! It will have a positive long-term effect just like the Iran war footgun accelerates renewable energy transition.

[utilize1808]

Have you seen legitimate corporates use cracked software? If you do, then your competitors will report you; your employees will blackmail you. The risk is too great.

[0x3f]

This assumes the same reward ratio also continues, but that's not the case. A cutting edge LLM is something much more valuable than a cracked copy of Word. Just like the LLM providers themselves decided violating copyright was an acceptable risk, it entirely depends on how people see the tradeoffs, rather than being a categorical decision.

[utilize1808]

While that might be true, it is unlikely that open source models' capability will ever surpass frontier models --- if you have the best model (by some margin), then people will want to access it, even if it means going through compliance.

[gizzlon]

> it is unlikely that open source models' capability will ever surpass frontier models

Sure about that? Would you invest in products almost no-one can buy?

otoh, maybe China stop releasing their best models

[utilize1808]

Yes, that's what I meant. It's not that the Chinese will never be able to come up with models that superior --- it's simply that they will no longer have the incentive to open-source them once their models take the lead.

Training models are expensive. No one can do it for free for very long.

[microgpt]

I've seen "legitimate companies" commit piracy on a scale that well exceeds all cracked software piracy combined.

[tokai]

Microsoft shipped windows for years with files signed by a warez group because Microsoft developers had used a piece of pirated software. Nothing happened.

[Daishiman]

Then they'll outsource dev work to agencies that have no frills with it and move along.

[utilize1808]

As a company it is your responsibility to ensure your contractors are compliant. So won't work.

[civet_java]

I see your comments scattered across this thread with most converging on this thesis: "The US govt will regulate away the ability of US corporations and individuals to use unsanctioned AI models."

Which is a fair thesis. I've seen you counter people's predictions of how they think things will pan as a consequence. But what I'd really like to hear is what you think happens (in the US and internationally) as a consequence of such regulations?

[utilize1808]

USA will experience unprecedented prosperity from influx of global talents and capital who seek to amplify their productivity and profits by 10x.

[jauco]

He said copyright infringement. The company tfa is about literally trained its models using massive copyright infringement.

[sfifs]

And companies from outside the US will outcompete those from the US forcing more protectionism, higher prices in US etc. I think there have been several cycles of several industries that have gone through this cycle (cars, shipping?), and mostly forced to roll back.

[jesse_dot_id]

Streisand effect