|
|
|
|
|
by thraway3837
10 days ago
|
|
Can you or someone please explain several of the claims made in this tweet? "I am personally surprised the Chinese state continues to allow the open sourcing of models this good, given potential risks" what risks? I suspect the reason they are is 75% explained by strategic blindness/lack of AGI-pilledness (the CCP is very Yann Lecun-y in its views of AI). Confused what this means Open-weight models are inherently decelerationist, and I'm continually surprised to see the so-called "accelerationists" so excited about open-weight models. Confused again. One probable outcome of an open-weight-model-dominant world is full AI communism, which is precisely what China proposes: rather than a market product, AI is a "public good" which will ultimately be provided by the state as a kind of "digital public infrastructure." This future strikes me as a dystopian hellscape, but I've never met an open-weight models advocate who doesn't ultimately concede this is where things end. I don't understand this at all. Can someone in the know please use plain layman's terms to explain what this tweet is about? |
|
I think it's referring to the belief that LLMs are not the path towards AGI, and that LLM's, while useful, are not going to have the impact that the American labs believe it will have.