That's the problem when you don't own
this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2026
682 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
89355 readers
3157 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
You're never going to own an industrial scale datacenter
It belongs in the trash. We’re going to look back on these large LLMs like we look at the milkman
load more comments
(3 replies)
Can't let the plebeian have too much fun
That's a pretty significant part of the value and utility of AI...I bet stealing ppls ideas and getting to market first is still totally fine though, right?
Gee. I wonder why anyone would want the inefficiency of local inference?
Copyright violation from American AI hoovering up all the data is okie dokie unless it's used by peasants to threaten technology corporations.
I'm not defending them it's just comical hypocrisy, and ans I doubt China AI will have the same kneecapped coding capabilities.
Chinese models are kneecapping Tiananmen Square and Winnie the Pooh, they'll happily do anything else.
But at least they are open (Most of them at least).
So there's at least the possibility to lever these restrictions away.
While I agree that open-weight is better than nothing, it is not the same as open-source.
Having a truly open-source model would be wonderful and it would also allow us to verify what data it is trained on and whether it has the right to use that data.
The Open Source Initiative's definition of a fully open-source AI model includes the training data as a key element. Some developers wonder, however, how feasible it is to distribute the enormous datasets required.
He says Stanford HAI has staked out a specific bar: alignment with the Linux Foundation’s Model Openness Framework at its top tier, the “Open Science” class – meaning the code, the training data (or a thoroughly documented, auditable account of it), and the tooling are all released, not just the weights, alongside a real way for outside researchers and communities to download, run, study, contribute to, and modify the work. Anything short of that, in his view, forecloses entire lines of research: You can’t, for example, study how a model’s training data shapes its cultural assumptions, audit it for how fairly it represents different populations, or test new architectures at the scale where genuinely new behavior shows up. You can only observe a finished system from the outside and guess at why it does what it does.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Kimi K3.1 pro, had reverse engineering information pulled from its training data. So at least some of them are.
This is sick!
They started with limiting cyber research capabilities, now gaming, within a month... what?
Useless piece of shit. That's why I use Mistral.
Mistral, please do NOT go that way - I'd have to self-host my AI, and it ain't cheap :))
If that happens, there are many, many providers other than Mistral.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Boycott Anthropic.
In Soviet America, Anthropic Boycott You!
They’re training their models on my art. It’s only fair I get to use their technology in return.
The best part of paying for a coding assistant is discovering halfway through your project that it has developed opinions about what your project is allowed to be. Imagine your IDE refusing to compile because it thinks your game feels a little too much like Tetris. At least a compiler doesn’t pretend it’s doing you a favor.
I think that's what they wanted from the very beginning, to accelerate projects that are socially convenient for them, but not those that are not.
There's that issue with universal machines that some people don't like that others are allowed to make universal decisions.
I got shut down by it two days ago. It suddenly told me that the project I was working on had tripped some kind of guard, that it couldn't continue working with me on it, and it couldn't tell me why. I just went back to my local Qwen model. I can't see this doing great things for selling Claude subscriptions.
As it was before AI. Local is the answer when shared is at the mercy of interests antagonistic to the users.
load more comments
(1 replies)
My coworker recently had an experience where he was trying to fix a security hole and his AI wouldn't do it because it claimed that it was unsafe.
load more comments
(2 replies)
C'mon Claude, don't do us that way!
Please, please make it useless for as many use cases as possible. Then maybe it'll go away.
Was bound to happen eventually. They're going to try to make open models illegal now.
My opinions are that its fine to make llm projects that threaten corporations who rely on saas. Doesn't mean im going to use them or that they're any good, but I want to see these companies who are firing all their employees and throwing all their money at ai to get scourned. Will build more distrust between the corpos too.
And just to be clear its okay when they steal literally the entire world's knowledge base. But as soon as adobe and Microsoft see a 2% drop in profit all the sudden everyone's a terrorist, or its the worst thing to happen ever. I hate ai but I'll root for my enemy when he's destroying one of my original enemies, can't wait for these companies to burn. I'd go back to the stone ages if I knew elon, Sam Altmann, etc where all dead.
I’d go back to the stone ages if I knew elon, Sam Altmann, etc where all dead.
Going back to 80's tech where most things were still analog should do it. Pen and paper, fax machines, analog tape and vynil records
load more comments
(6 replies)
ai is gonna kill proprietary software! adobe and microsoft are done for now that we can reverse engineer their products with ai and make them open source!!!
you naive fools… the copyright of corporations is sacrosanct, remember? not like the copyleft of independent artists or free software. that can be violated at will!
There are openweight models that are really capable at this point.
So it might be that the American corporations try the most that this will not happen, but I think we are close to a point where this doesn't matter anymore.
AI cloning is just a thing that is a reality now...
As someone who puts their hobbiest projects out under AGPL, having my licenses teeth kicked in even more has NOT been helpful..
Local LLMs are the way to go on AI, they can't suddenly change the model up on you. And also, I guess Anthropic just wants their models to be more useless ahead of going public? Because I presume people that want to use AI, who don't care where they send their data to, but don't want to nagged about how they can't do benign programming and analysis tasks, will just choose another model provider.
They are the way to go, but hardware pricing makes it cost-prohibitive to match frontier capabilities, which makes decomp and recomp difficult. Or rather, they require more skill and take longer, introducing some barriers against the current floodgates being flung open.
We all know the eye-watering prices GPUs and RAM cost now, to say nothing of Unified Memory devices like the Strix. Most people just don't have a spare $10K to throw at an inference box that can run (say) a 300B model at interactive (not batch) speeds.
Coming at this from another angle tho, I note that according to Steam stats, the most popular GPUs are in the 8GB and 16GB range...which is smack bang in the VRAM range of what a good MoE (say, Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B) runs on (for 8GB) or arguably the best local dense coder (Qwen 3.8 27B) can live at. Which leaves us with a capable assistant and a capable coder.
I think there's probably room for LLM improvement in the 8–16GB range too...and given that most consumer PCs and laptops live there, I'm sanguine the open-weight devs might make it happen.
But I also suspect the gatekeeping of high-end capacities is intentional.
We're probably not going to have the ability to vibe code Mario into Elden Ring again...not without significantly more skill. Dunno.
It's more about not spooking investors. If it's known that your AI is being used to reverse engineer software from well off corporations. They're going to be a little less likely to invest if 1: They're connected to any of those corporations 2: They're concerned about future lawsuits heading their way.
And of course the actual fear of potential lawsuits landing on their door, or being named in lawsuits against people using their AI to do this.
Yes, if you want control over AI you MUST host it yourself in reality.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
Too late... the genie is out of the bottle now! All those corporate software copyright moats are being attacked, and there's nothing they can do about it, lmao. Set it all free :)
Couldn't come at a better time. Enshittification has hit the software industry hard. The argument for captialism is that it makes the best product at the lowest price. However the recent reality is that capitalism makes the worst product for the highest price.
Burn it all down.
load more comments
(1 replies)
now try to do the same and tell your boss you won't do something because you don't wanna
This is what happens when you rely on the products of giant corporations.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Well that was an impressive speed run to enshitifcation. What kind of sensorship is queued up next?
This comment has been flagged for reason [anticapitalism]. You may revert this conversation to an earlier point or switch to a non-american model
"Why have you done nothing for the past week?"
"Sorry boss, the AI refuses to do my work for me"
i know we've had our fun putting middle fingers up towards Adobe and the like, but these kinds of restrictions are needed to protect developers who aren't insanely wealthy.
from the article, which i'm sure you all read:
And yet there are situations that merit some discussion, like the recent controversy about the Steam Next Fest being chock-full of AI slop copied from existing titles. That particular situation is getting particularly nasty, as game developers are reportedly being extorted under threat that their game demos will be cloned into complete games before they have a chance to finish and release the original.
Adding insult to injury, this is seemingly being done to small studios whose main priority is usually "having food," rather than big publishers looking to microtransaction everything into a new yacht for shareholders.
While it's a worry for sure, I don't see such AI creations becoming the mainstream.
Why? Because just like software, game develip needs the inspiration, the creative spark.
Sure you can create a copy of an existing software... But it either doesn't go anywhere (because why would someone want a sloppy copy of a copy of a copy?), or it pivots to actually serving needs that exist on the market.
In other words: an artist or developer with the inspiration, the genuine original idea, will create something actually enjoyable/useful, whereas a copycat will always just be that, someone who saw an idea and decided to copy it without adding anything to it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
But this is restricting the user, not protecting the developers.
Unscrupulous developers can rip off code using another model, including local ones that can make literally anything. Opt-in protections against doing something bad to someone else don't work.
It's like selling cars with Tullock spikes.
load more comments
(2 replies)