Microsoft Probing If DeepSeek-Linked Group Improperly Obtained OpenAI Data

[email protected]

No AI company has ever made any of their own content to train their models, they took what others created, remixed it, and presented it as something new.

This AI model did the same thing.

AI lost its job to AI.

[email protected]

Actually, it was invented by Douglas Engelbart in Stanford in the 60s

https://dougengelbart.org/content/view/162/000/

Xerox (re)made it for the PC in the 80s.

[email protected]

Ah TIL! I didn't know it originated elsewhere.

So while it's true Apple and Microsoft got the idea from Xerox, Xerox didn't originate it.

[email protected]

Yes, but that doesn't mean it is more efficient, which is what the whole thing is about.

Let's pretend we're not talking about AI, but tuna fishing. OpenTuna is sending hundreds of ships to the ocean to go fishing. It's extremely expensive, but it gets results.

If another fish distributor shows up out of nowhere selling tuna for 1/10 the price, it would be amazing. But if you found out that they could sell them cheap because they were stealing the fish from OpenTuna warehouses, you wouldn't argue that the secret to catching fish going forward is theft and stop building boats.

[email protected]

Surely they'd like some cheese to go with that whine?

[email protected]

Isn't the OpenAI one they offer the same one as the one provided at https://chatgpt.com/ without login? So probably something not as impactful.

Or do they share their unlimited subscription?

[email protected]

Yes, I would.

[email protected]

So what happens when OpenTuna runs out of fish to steal and there are no more boats?

Information doesn't stop being created. AI models need to be constantly trained and updated with new information. One of the biggest issues with GPT3 was the 2021 knowledge cutoff.

Let's pretend you're building a legal analysis AI tool that scrapes the web for information on local, state, and federal law in the US. If your model was from January 2008 and was never updated, then gay marriage wouldn't be legal in the US, the ACA wouldn't exist, Super PACs would be illegal, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau wouldn't exist, zoning ordinances in pretty much every city would be out of date, and openly carrying a handgun in Texas would get you jailtime.

It would essentially be a useless tool, and copying that old training data wouldn't make a better product no matter how cheap it was to do.

[email protected]

Once tuna runs out, and we run out of boats?

Maybe we then stop destroying the tuna population?

Or, to bring this back to point: the environment will be better off once the AI bubble collapses.

[email protected]

They didn’t steal it from Smith & Wesson?

[email protected]

What the fuck is Microsoft getting involved for?! Maybe concentrate on not providing shitty fucking software fuck heads!

[email protected]

When a writer copies someone else's work without cites or compensation, it's called "plagiarism." But when an AI does it, it's called "LLM training."

[email protected]

Unless that AI is not OpenAI, then it's "plagiarism" still.

[email protected]

They have a large stake in OpenAI, last I checked.

[email protected]

I ducking knew it too, I've been a long for the ride though. The models still do have some niche applications where they're actually useful.

This whole thing with OpenAI and Microsoft whinging about fair play is truly laughable though. What clowns.

As a side note, it took a few tries to write ducking, my keyboard kept correcting it to fucking. We're definitely 2 different people. Lol.

[email protected]

That's a very important, but entirely separate conversation.

[email protected]

Making R1 open source really makes it such a big FU to all the grifters asking for billions for AI in the us. Especially funny because high-flyer is a hedge fund firm themselves. The ai race should only be determined by what you do with it, not protecting how much IP you hoovered up and are now trying to cry about it being copied by others.

[email protected]

Its actually very much the conversation. The quicker the race to the bottom happens, the quicker this entire bubble bursts, and the quicker we stop torching the planet for imaginary profits.

[email protected]

That's your opinion/agenda, not a legitimate argument in the conversation about AI efficiency. The discussion is on how best to achieve a goal, and you're saying that it shouldn't be achieved. Even if you're right, you're still going off on a separate tangent.

You're the vegan who butts in on the conversation about how best to sear a steak and says meat is murder. You're welcome to your opinion on meat and you may even be right, but it is of absolutely no value or interest to the people talking about methods for cooking meat.

[email protected]

That’s your opinion/agenda, not a legitimate argument in the conversation about AI efficiency

I'm not arguing about the "efficiency" of it. I'm stating that OpenAI did the exact same thing they are complaining DeepSeek did: Steal other's work, remix it, and then claimed it as their own.

And to reply to you "tuna fisher" analogy, I would be fully ok with people stealing the loads of tuna, to hasten the collapse of the entire industry.

Its you who is getting into the weeds about this, not I.

agnos.is Forums

Microsoft Probing If DeepSeek-Linked Group Improperly Obtained OpenAI Data