undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdavidw17d ago0 comments

> LLM as the main weapon

LLM's - to date - seem to require massive capital expenditures to have the highest quality ones, which is a monumental shift in power towards mega corporations and away from the world of open source where you could do innovative work on your own computer running Linux or FreeBSD or some other open OS.

I don't think that's an exciting idea for the Free Software Foundation.

Perhaps with time we'll be able to run local ones that are 'good enough', but we're not there yet.

There's also an ethical/moral question that these things have been trained on millions of hours of people's volunteer work and the benefits of that are going to accrue to the mega corporations.

Edit: I guess the conclusion I come to is that LLM's are good for 'getting things done', but the context in which they are operating is one where the balance of power is heavily tilted towards capital, and open source is perhaps less interesting to participate in if the machines are just going to slurp it up and people don't have to respect the license or even acknowledge your work.

0 comments

ordu17d ago

> LLM's - to date - seem to require massive capital expenditures to have the highest quality ones, which is a monumental shift in power towards mega corporations and away from the world of open source

Yeah, a bit of a conundrum. But I don't think that fighting for copyright now can bring any benefits for FOSS. GNU should bring Stallman back and see whether he can come with any new ideas and a new strategy. Alternatively they could try without Stallman. But the point is: they should stop and think again. Maybe they will find a way forward, maybe they won't but it means that either they could continue their fight for a freedom meaningfully, or they could just stop fighting and find some other things to do. Both options are better then fighting for copyright.

> There's also an ethical/moral question that these things have been trained on millions of hours of people's volunteer work and the benefits of that are going to accrue to the mega corporations.

I want a clarify this statement a bit. The thing with LLM relying on work of others are not against GPU philosophy as I understand it: algorithms have to be free. Nothing wrong with training LLMs on them or on programs implementing them. Nothing wrong with using these LLMs to write new (free) programs. What is wrong are corporations reaping all the benefits now and locking down new algorithms later.

I think it is important, because copyright is deemed to be an ethical thing by many (I think for most people it is just a deduction: abiding the law is ethical, therefore copyright is ethical), but not for GNU.

balamatom17d ago

>Yeah, a bit of a conundrum.

IMO the primary significant trend in AI. Doesn't get talked about nearly enough. Means the AI is working, I guess.

>GNU should bring Stallman back ... Alternatively they could try without Stallman.

Leave Britney alone >:(

>copyright is deemed to be an ethical thing by many (I think for most people it is just a deduction: abiding the law is ethical, therefore copyright is ethical)

I've busted out "intellectual property is a crime against humanity" at layfolk to see if that shortcuts through that entire little politico-philosophical minefield. They emote the requisite mild shock when such things as crimes against humanity are mentioned; as well as at someone making such a radical statement which seems to come from no familiar species of echo chamber; and then a moment later they begin to very much look like they see where I'm coming from.

Serenacula17d ago

How do you even argue such a thing? I've had no such luck, I've met many people who seem to view copyright and a person owning their ideas and work as a sort of inherent moral.

2 more replies

zozbot23417d ago

> LLM's - to date - seem to require massive capital expenditures to have the highest quality ones

There are near-SOTA LLM's available under permissive licenses. Even running them doesn't require prohibitive expenses on hardware unless you insist on realtime use.

walterbell17d ago

> running them doesn't require prohibitive expenses on hardware

What async tasks could a local LLM accomplish on Intel 11th gen CPU with 32GB RAM?

Aozora717d ago

>Perhaps with time we'll be able to run local ones that are 'good enough', but we're not there yet.

Right now, we can get local models that you can run on consumer hardware, that match capabilities of state of the art models from two years ago. The improvements to model architecture may or may not maintain the same pace in the future, but we will get a local equivalent to Opus 4.6 or whatever other benchmark of "good enough" you have, in the foreseeable future.

tmp1042328844217d ago

> LLM's - to date - seem to require massive capital expenditures to have the highest quality ones, which is a monumental shift in power towards mega corporations and away from the world of open source where you could do innovative work on your own computer running Linux or FreeBSD or some other open OS.

When the FSF and GPL were created, I don't think this was really a consideration. They were perfectly happy with requiring Big Iron Unix or an esoteric Lisp Machine to use the software - they just wanted to have the ability to customize and distribute fixes and enhancements to it.

davidwOP16d ago

Free software didn't really take off until a couple of things happened 1) personal computers got good enough to run Linux and BSD and 2) more people get connected to the internet.

The 'good enough' part is the important one here, I think.

shadowgovt17d ago

How close are we to good enough and who's working on that? I would be interested in supporting that work; to my mind, many of the real objections to LLMs are diminished if we can make them small and cheap enough to run in the home (and, perhaps, trained with distributed shared resources, although the training problem is the harder one).

davidwOP17d ago

Good question. It seems like most of the tech world is perfectly happy to be sharecroppers on the Big AI farms. I guess that's not quite the right analogy, since they're doing their own things with it; just that at the end of the day, the tool they're building everything on is owned by someone else.

jacquesm17d ago

> There's also an ethical/moral question that these things have been trained on millions of hours of people's volunteer work and the benefits of that are going to accrue to the mega corporations.

This was already the case and it just got worse, not better.

davidwOP17d ago

At a certain point, I think we had reached a kind of equilibrium where some corporations were decent open source citizens. They understood that they could open source things like infrastructure or libraries and keep their 'crown jewels' closed. And while Stallman types might not have been happy with that, it seemed to work out for people.

Now they've just hoovered up all the free stuff into machines that can mix it up enough to spit it out in a way that doesn't even require attribution, and you have to pay to use their machine.

jacquesm17d ago

AI essentially gatekeeps all of open source to companies to pluck from to their hearts content. And individual contributors using these tools and freely mixing it with their own - usual minor - contributions are another step of whitewashing because they're definitely not going to own up to writing only 5% of the stuff they got paid for.

Before we had RedHat and Ubuntu, who at least were contributing back, now we have Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI who are racing to lock the barn door around their new captive sheep. It's just a massive IP laundromat.

stalfie16d ago

To be fair to the companies, the machine was pretty hard to make, and expensive. Its not exactly unreasonable to charge for it.

2 more replies

thenewnewguy17d ago

Is massive capital expenditure not also required to enforce the GPL? If some company steals your GPLed code and doesn't follow the license, you will have to sue them and somebody will have to pay the lawyers.

davidwOP17d ago

> Is massive capital expenditure not also required to enforce the GPL?

It's nowhere near the order of magnitude of the kind of spending they're sinking into LLM's. The FSF and other groups were reasonably successful at enforcing the GPL, operating on a budget 1000's of times smaller than that of AI companies.

cloverich17d ago

Right but LLM companies are building frontier models with frontier talent while trying to sock up demand with a loss leader strategy, on top of an historic infrastructure build out.

Being able to coat efficiently run frontier models is i think, not a high priced endeavor for an org (compared to an individual).

IMO the proposition is little fishy, but its not totally without merit and imo deserves investigation. If we are all worried about our jobs, even via building custom for sale software, there is likely something there that may obviate the need at least for end user applications. Again, im deeply skeptical, but it is interesting.

1 more reply

socalgal217d ago

Maybe a good open source idea is to "seti at home" style crowd-source training, assuming that's possible.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

ordu17d ago

> There's also an ethical/moral question that these things have been trained on millions of hours of people's volunteer work and the benefits of that are going to accrue to the mega corporations.

balamatom17d ago

>Yeah, a bit of a conundrum.

IMO the primary significant trend in AI. Doesn't get talked about nearly enough. Means the AI is working, I guess.

>GNU should bring Stallman back ... Alternatively they could try without Stallman.

Leave Britney alone >:(

>copyright is deemed to be an ethical thing by many (I think for most people it is just a deduction: abiding the law is ethical, therefore copyright is ethical)

Serenacula17d ago

How do you even argue such a thing? I've had no such luck, I've met many people who seem to view copyright and a person owning their ideas and work as a sort of inherent moral.

2 more replies

zozbot23417d ago

> LLM's - to date - seem to require massive capital expenditures to have the highest quality ones

There are near-SOTA LLM's available under permissive licenses. Even running them doesn't require prohibitive expenses on hardware unless you insist on realtime use.

walterbell17d ago

> running them doesn't require prohibitive expenses on hardware

What async tasks could a local LLM accomplish on Intel 11th gen CPU with 32GB RAM?

Aozora717d ago

>Perhaps with time we'll be able to run local ones that are 'good enough', but we're not there yet.

tmp1042328844217d ago

davidwOP16d ago

Free software didn't really take off until a couple of things happened 1) personal computers got good enough to run Linux and BSD and 2) more people get connected to the internet.

The 'good enough' part is the important one here, I think.

shadowgovt17d ago

davidwOP17d ago

jacquesm17d ago

> There's also an ethical/moral question that these things have been trained on millions of hours of people's volunteer work and the benefits of that are going to accrue to the mega corporations.

This was already the case and it just got worse, not better.

davidwOP17d ago

Now they've just hoovered up all the free stuff into machines that can mix it up enough to spit it out in a way that doesn't even require attribution, and you have to pay to use their machine.

jacquesm17d ago

stalfie16d ago

To be fair to the companies, the machine was pretty hard to make, and expensive. Its not exactly unreasonable to charge for it.

2 more replies

thenewnewguy17d ago

davidwOP17d ago

> Is massive capital expenditure not also required to enforce the GPL?

cloverich17d ago

Right but LLM companies are building frontier models with frontier talent while trying to sock up demand with a loss leader strategy, on top of an historic infrastructure build out.

Being able to coat efficiently run frontier models is i think, not a high priced endeavor for an org (compared to an individual).

1 more reply

socalgal217d ago

Maybe a good open source idea is to "seti at home" style crowd-source training, assuming that's possible.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse