TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

780 点作者 jonbaer2 个月前

99 条评论

pr337h4m2 个月前
&gt;Chris Lehane, OpenAI’s vice president of global affairs, said in an interview that the US AI Safety Institute – a key government group focused on AI – could act as the main point of contact between the federal government and the private sector. If companies work with the group voluntarily to review models, the government could provide them “with liability protections including preemption from state based regulations that focus on frontier model security,” according to the proposal.<p>Given OpenAI&#x27;s history and relationship with the &quot;AI safety&quot; movement, I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised to find out later that they also lobbied for the same proposed state-level regulations they&#x27;re seeking relief from.
评论 #43355643 未加载
评论 #43356381 未加载
评论 #43355550 未加载
评论 #43357149 未加载
评论 #43357337 未加载
评论 #43356461 未加载
评论 #43356239 未加载
评论 #43360685 未加载
WiSaGaN2 个月前
Before Deepseek, Meta open-sourced a good LLM. At the time, the narrative pushed by OpenAI and Anthropic was centered on &#x27;safety.&#x27; Now, with the emergence of Deepseek, OpenAI and Anthropic have pivoted to a national security narrative. It is becoming tiresome to watch these rent seekers attacking open source to justify their valuations.
评论 #43360705 未加载
评论 #43362694 未加载
dchichkov2 个月前
&gt;&gt; In the proposal, OpenAI also said the U.S. needs “a copyright strategy that promotes the freedom to learn” and on “preserving American AI models’ ability to learn from copyrighted material.”<p>Perhaps also symmetric &quot;freedom to learn&quot; from OpenAI models, with some provisions &#x2F; naming convention? U.S. labs are limited in this way, while labs in China are not.
评论 #43355167 未加载
评论 #43355304 未加载
评论 #43355758 未加载
评论 #43358267 未加载
评论 #43355225 未加载
评论 #43355767 未加载
评论 #43355081 未加载
评论 #43357842 未加载
评论 #43358787 未加载
code_runner2 个月前
Its sort of crazy to think about how big tech companies have a smaller and smaller window to be a &quot;fun&quot; and interesting story&#x2F;idea. Facebook was pretty fun for a bit, google was obviously an idea factory for a while and even stuff like the doodles were a big deal.<p>Stuff like Uber and AirBnB were controversial at some levels but still generally &quot;game changers&quot; in specific industries and it was fun&#x2F;interesting to be early adopters.<p>OpenAI was under the radar IRT public consciousness pre-gpt3.5.... we all had fun w&#x2F; chatGPT... and then immediately OAI starts generating headlines that are not fun&#x2F;inventive&#x2F;quirky. A lot of regulatory stuff, governments around the world. Instant globalization + general horror.
评论 #43363163 未加载
评论 #43362969 未加载
评论 #43364067 未加载
light_triad2 个月前
It coincides with this: OpenAI calls DeepSeek ‘state-controlled,’ calls for bans on ‘PRC-produced’ models<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;techcrunch.com&#x2F;2025&#x2F;03&#x2F;13&#x2F;openai-calls-deepseek-state-controlled-calls-for-bans-on-prc-produced-models&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;techcrunch.com&#x2F;2025&#x2F;03&#x2F;13&#x2F;openai-calls-deepseek-stat...</a><p>On HN: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43355779">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43355779</a>
评论 #43359531 未加载
ch4s32 个月前
I&#x27;m surprised to see only one comment here addressing the issue of Chinese AI companies just flatly ignoring US copyright and IP laws&#x2F;norms. I wonder if there is a viable path where we can facilitate some sort of economic remuneration for people who write and create visual art while not giving up the game to Chinese companies.<p>This seems to be a thorny dilemma.
评论 #43357887 未加载
评论 #43356910 未加载
评论 #43362854 未加载
评论 #43360889 未加载
评论 #43384128 未加载
评论 #43356460 未加载
评论 #43356487 未加载
austin-cheney2 个月前
A slippery slope to eliminate copyright out right. The argument made is that AI is somehow more special and will otherwise lose to competition with China.<p>The flaw there is that AI is not more special than any other endeavor while all other American markets must equally compete with China.<p>What that failure means is that when anything is exceptional then everything becomes exceptional because the economic conditions apply equally and therefore bypassing copyright protections applies equally to anybody facing external competition.
评论 #43360767 未加载
评论 #43365076 未加载
评论 #43360775 未加载
评论 #43360744 未加载
crorella2 个月前
If they want to avoid paying for the creative effort of authors and other artists then they should also not charge for the use of their models.
评论 #43356594 未加载
评论 #43355338 未加载
评论 #43356492 未加载
评论 #43356118 未加载
评论 #43356334 未加载
msp262 个月前
Relevant (I don&#x27;t know why the article doesn&#x27;t link to them directly): <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;openai.com&#x2F;global-affairs&#x2F;openai-proposals-for-the-us-ai-action-plan&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;openai.com&#x2F;global-affairs&#x2F;openai-proposals-for-the-u...</a> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdn.openai.com&#x2F;global-affairs&#x2F;ostp-rfi&#x2F;ec680b75-d539-4653-b297-8bcf6e5f7686&#x2F;openai-response-ostp-nsf-rfi-notice-request-for-information-on-the-development-of-an-artificial-intelligence-ai-action-plan.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdn.openai.com&#x2F;global-affairs&#x2F;ostp-rfi&#x2F;ec680b75-d539...</a>
评论 #43358061 未加载
insane_dreamer2 个月前
DeepSeek&#x2F;whoever training on OpenAI outputs is ... bad.<p>OpenAI training on every content creator&#x27;s outputs is ... good.
评论 #43356199 未加载
ApolloFortyNine2 个月前
It probably needs to be a law not an executive order but I don&#x27;t hate the idea.<p>States have the power to make it prohibitively expensive to operate in those states, leaving people to either go to VPNs or use AI&#x27;s hosted in other countries where they don&#x27;t care if they&#x27;re not following whatever new AI law California decides to pass. And companies would choose just to use datacenters not in the prohibitive states and ban ips from those states.<p>Course if a company hosts in us-east-1, and allows access from California, would the inter state commerce clause not take effect and California would have no power anyways?
评论 #43355325 未加载
评论 #43357029 未加载
评论 #43355430 未加载
评论 #43355439 未加载
评论 #43357437 未加载
Animats2 个月前
The demand here for federal preemption of state law has nothing to do with copyright. Copyright is entirely federal level today. It has to do with preventing the use of AI to enable various forms of oppression.[1] Plus the usual child porno stuff.<p>What AI companies are really worried about is a right of appeal from decisions made by a computer. The EU has that. &quot;<i>Individuals should not be subject to a decision that is based solely on automated processing (such as algorithms) and that is legally binding or which significantly affects them.&quot;</i>[2] This moves the cost of LLM errors from the customer to the company offering the service.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;calmatters.org&#x2F;economy&#x2F;technology&#x2F;2024&#x2F;09&#x2F;california-ai-safety-regulations-bills&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;calmatters.org&#x2F;economy&#x2F;technology&#x2F;2024&#x2F;09&#x2F;california...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commission.europa.eu&#x2F;law&#x2F;law-topic&#x2F;data-protection&#x2F;rules-business-and-organisations&#x2F;dealing-citizens&#x2F;are-there-restrictions-use-automated-decision-making_en" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commission.europa.eu&#x2F;law&#x2F;law-topic&#x2F;data-protection&#x2F;r...</a>
评论 #43359182 未加载
评论 #43359240 未加载
srg02 个月前
Copyrighted material includes works by authors from outside the US. By Berne convention, the exceptions which any country may introduce must not &quot;conflict with a normal exploitation of the work&quot; and &quot;unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author&quot;. So if at least one French author does license their work for AI training, then any exception of this kind will harm their legitimate interests and rob them of potential income from normal exploitation of the work.<p>If the US can harm authors from other countries, then other countries may be willing to reciprocate to American copyright holders, and introduce exceptions which allow free use of the US copyrighted material for some specific purposes they deem important.<p>IANAL, but it is a slippery slope, and it may hurt everyone. Who has more to lose?<p>And I hope that Mistral.AI takes note.
评论 #43360952 未加载
hansmayer2 个月前
I just wish they understood they are limited not by the content available, but by the intrinsic characteristics of the architecture and algorithms of LLMs. It&#x27;s just not the AGI that will magically open it&#x27;s eyes one day.The sooner we stop burning billions of dollars on it, the better.
baskinator2 个月前
How big was the check that came with this request? For the right price their logo can go on the rose garden lawn.
评论 #43357219 未加载
pmxi2 个月前
Here&#x27;s a direct link to the article: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bloomberg.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;articles&#x2F;2025-03-13&#x2F;openai-asks-white-house-for-relief-from-state-ai-rules" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bloomberg.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;articles&#x2F;2025-03-13&#x2F;openai-as...</a>
Swizec2 个月前
Funfact: The reason Hollywood is in California is because Edison’s camera patents didn’t apply there. Altman might actually have a good point – if your competition doesn’t care about your laws, you’re in trouble.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mentalfloss.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;51722&#x2F;thomas-edison-drove-film-industry-california" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mentalfloss.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;51722&#x2F;thomas-edison-drov...</a>
userbinator2 个月前
I think there will be a huge change in public perception of copyright in general, as increasingly more people realise that everything is a derivative work.
评论 #43359190 未加载
评论 #43359112 未加载
secondary_op2 个月前
Free market y all !<p>OpenAI calls DeepSeek &#x27;state-controlled,&#x27; calls for bans<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43355779">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43355779</a>
评论 #43358821 未加载
janalsncm2 个月前
It seems really weird that Congress isn’t making a law about this. Instead, we’re asking courts to contort old laws to apply to something which is pretty different from the things they were originally intended for. Or just asking the executive to make law by diktat. Maybe letting the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world will work out. Maybe not.<p>This issue is too complicated for Congress to handle? Too bad. Offloading it to the president or a judge doesn’t solve that problem.<p>The world is becoming more and more complicated and we need smart people who can figure out how things work, not a retirement community.
tmnvix2 个月前
I&#x27;ve heard so many ridiculous stories about &#x27;AI&#x27; that I&#x27;m at the point where I initially took this to mean the LLM and not the company had made the request.<p>I expect that interpretation won&#x27;t seem outlandish in the future.
评论 #43357678 未加载
fazeirony2 个月前
the GOP: &quot;states&#x27; rights! states&#x27; rights!!&quot;<p>also the GOP: &quot;not <i>those</i> rights! only the rights we want to share&quot;
评论 #43356870 未加载
评论 #43368742 未加载
评论 #43358087 未加载
sd92 个月前
Am I the only one who thinks “freedom to learn” is an anthropomorphising euphemism?
deepsummer2 个月前
I think an AI should be treated like a human. A human can consume copyright material (possibly after paying for it), but not reproduce it. I don&#x27;t see any reason why the same can&#x27;t be true for an AI.
评论 #43360948 未加载
评论 #43360913 未加载
Havoc2 个月前
&gt;liability protections<p>The industry that just ran roughshod over a couple million copyright holders intentionally despite knowing it is on legal shaky ground now wants liability protection for itself?<p>Bunch of immoral shysters...
rvz2 个月前
OpenAI (2023): Don&#x27;t even bother trying to compete against us, you will not win and you will lose.<p>OpenAI (2025): pLeAse bAn dEEpSeEk!!11!, bAn poWerFulL oPen wEight Ai mOdeLs!!1
xrd2 个月前
The follow-on prompt was &quot;add the word freedom a lot more.&quot;
评论 #43361217 未加载
qoez2 个月前
JD vance seems to be quite aware of OpenAIs meta strategy so I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised if this is declined (ie semi specifically aimed at something they want to force them to comply with).
评论 #43358883 未加载
bambax2 个月前
The original link has apparently been changed to a content-free Yahoo post, for some reason only known to &quot;moderators&quot;, which makes existing comments bizarre to read.<p>The original link pointed to this OpenAI document:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;openai.com&#x2F;global-affairs&#x2F;openai-proposals-for-the-us-ai-action-plan&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;openai.com&#x2F;global-affairs&#x2F;openai-proposals-for-the-u...</a><p>It contains this remarkable phrase:<p>&gt; <i>For innovation to truly create new freedoms, America’s builders, developers, and entrepreneurs—our nation’s greatest competitive advantage—must first have the freedom to innovate in the national interest.</i><p>I don&#x27;t think people need &quot;new freedoms&quot;. They need their existing freedoms, that are threatened everywhere and esp. by the new administration, to be respected.<p>And I would argue that America&#x27;s greatest strength isn&#x27;t their &quot;builders&quot;; it&#x27;s its ability to produce BS at such a massive scale (and believe in it).<p>This OpenAI &quot;proposal&quot; is a masterpiece of BS. An American masterpiece.
holografix2 个月前
“We want more regulation! AI is too dangerous, too powerful for any person off the street to use!”<p>Meanwhile exact same guy in Europe:<p>“Less regulation! You are strangling our innovation!”
someothherguyy2 个月前
Yeah, shorten the terms of copyright on original works by about 90%, and call it a win for everyone except for rights holders.
评论 #43361369 未加载
trevor-e2 个月前
The easiest logical way I can make sense of this problem is to apply it to humans. Copyrighted material has tremendously impacted my thinking and work, but I had to pay to access it. And as long as I&#x27;m not publishing copies of the copyrighted work, derivative work seems to be fair use. This seems fair for everyone, if they want to train on a resource then they should pay for it.<p>The only angle I can see this working for OpenAI is pushing the anti-China national security threat narrative, which I expect to see a lot more of this year (especially with this administration). While I personally hate that, I can definitely see how AI + drones are the obvious future in warfare, so I don&#x27;t think it&#x27;s that far-fetched to work.
SebFender2 个月前
This dudes (can&#x27;t write his name) way of thinking on content disrupts fair use by scaling copyrighted material consumption without clear boundaries - and somebody needs to stop this.<p>Unlike human-driven transformation, AI replicates patterns, creating derivative works that compete with originals.<p>OpenAI profits from this without compensating creators, undermining economic incentives for human creativity altogether.<p>All this instead of relying on fair use, it should pursue licensing to uphold intellectual property rights - and if that doesn&#x27;t work it then means the business plan is bad.<p>It&#x27;s just like saying - &quot;If I need to pay for the food, I won&#x27;t be able to make my plates.&quot;<p>Bad plan - bad business.
antonkar2 个月前
Basically stole almost whole output of humanity both dead and alive, put it in their Frankenstein Monsters’ ever growing brains and now want to let em roam unsupervised longer and longer (AI agents) and continue to steal things.<p>Taking away human freedoms and giving em to agents 101
评论 #43360900 未加载
hsuduebc22 个月前
Regulations were convenient to slow down competitors—you know, the ones you heavily lobbied for—it was all great. But now that you&#x27;ve done your part and others are finally catching up, suddenly it&#x27;s all about easing restrictions to protect your lead? Beautiful.
fmajid2 个月前
Well, if we finally have hundred-billion-dollar corporations pushing back on the copyfight around the continual expansion of copyright (e.g. the congressman for Disney, Sonny Bono) or abusive laws like DMCA, that&#x27;s a welcome development.
csomar2 个月前
&gt; An export control strategy that exports democratic AI: For countries seeking access to American AI, we propose a strategy that would apply a commercial growth lens—both Total and Serviceable Addressable Markets—to proactively promote the global adoption of American AI systems and with them, the freedoms they create. At the same time, the strategy would use export controls to protect America’s AI lead, including by making updates to the AI diffusion rule.<p>What a bunch of gibberish hot garbage.
评论 #43360840 未加载
steveBK1232 个月前
The right loves states rights, unless it conflicts with their personal preferences.
stargrazer2 个月前
So, why not pay the price of each copyrighted work ingested by the model?
评论 #43359047 未加载
评论 #43359137 未加载
ThatMedicIsASpy2 个月前
You steal from others and make them pay - constant scraping cost money (traffic, server load, scraping protection). Then you should only be allowed to release open source models.
评论 #43361262 未加载
grahar642 个月前
Well funded companies want regulations because it stops up and coming companies from competing. Now they want exemptions from those regulations because it would be too restrictive.
croes2 个月前
&gt; OpenAI has asked the Trump administration to help shield artificial intelligence companies from a growing number of proposed state regulations if they voluntarily share their models with the federal government.<p>That sounds like corruption
评论 #43355651 未加载
chvid2 个月前
The full 15-page proposal from OpenAI to the White House:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdn.openai.com&#x2F;global-affairs&#x2F;ostp-rfi&#x2F;ec680b75-d539-4653-b297-8bcf6e5f7686&#x2F;openai-response-ostp-nsf-rfi-notice-request-for-information-on-the-development-of-an-artificial-intelligence-ai-action-plan.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdn.openai.com&#x2F;global-affairs&#x2F;ostp-rfi&#x2F;ec680b75-d539...</a>
ein0p2 个月前
Something is telling me getting anything favorable out of the White House with sama at the helm is going to be extremely difficult for OpenAI: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;sama&#x2F;status&#x2F;787847722514526208" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;sama&#x2F;status&#x2F;787847722514526208</a>
cratermoon2 个月前
Buried the lede:<p>&gt; OpenAI also reiterated its call for the government to take steps to support AI infrastructure investments and called for copyright reform, arguing that America’s fair use doctrine is critical to maintaining AI leadership. OpenAI and other AI developers have faced numerous copyright lawsuits over the data used to build their models.
hello_computer2 个月前
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;TMHCw3RqulY" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;TMHCw3RqulY</a>
iamleppert2 个月前
He should have offered for every purchase of OpenAI services, a portion would be used to purchase TrumpCoin. That would have been a more effective bribe.
评论 #43355309 未加载
nomilk2 个月前
Wonder how much the addition of copyrighted material affects how smart the resulting model is. If it&#x27;s even 20% better LLM makers could be forced out of the US into jurisdictions that allow use of copyrighted data.<p>I suspect most LLM users will ~always choose the smartest model.
评论 #43361011 未加载
评论 #43360898 未加载
评论 #43360858 未加载
ChrisArchitect2 个月前
Related:<p><i>Google’s comments on the U.S. AI Action Plan</i><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.google&#x2F;outreach-initiatives&#x2F;public-policy&#x2F;google-us-ai-action-plan-comments&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.google&#x2F;outreach-initiatives&#x2F;public-policy&#x2F;googl...</a>
BenFranklin1002 个月前
Putting legal issues aside for a moment, I argue copyrighted material should be considered fair use simply by virtue of the enormous societal benefits LLMs&#x2F;AI bring in making the vast expanse of human knowledge accessible.<p>It’s a major step forward for humanity.
评论 #43359192 未加载
评论 #43365337 未加载
sunshine-o2 个月前
Funny how fast those AI prophets went from:<p>- The government need to prepare because soon they will need to give money to all those people we made obsolete and unemployed. And there is nothing to stop us.<p>to:<p>- We need money from the government to do that thing we told you about.
评论 #43358359 未加载
JohnFen2 个月前
I really hope OpenAI fails in doing this. If this usage is allowed, then it means that there is no path towards me being OK with publishing anything on the internet again.
sashank_15092 个月前
Still not convinced how a model training on data, is not the same as a human looking at that data and then using it indirectly as it’s now a part of his knowledge base
评论 #43360715 未加载
bhanks2 个月前
Begs the question what the founder’s intent was with the 10th amendment. I’d say it covers AI until you get federal dollars tied to it.
JKCalhoun2 个月前
I&#x27;m assuming this has zero effect on non-US AI companies?
m3kw92 个月前
Maybe this data constraint from data vs GPU constraint for China will force America to innovate. Maybe innovate in data generation
dtquad2 个月前
It is interesting that it is not the Hollywood&#x2F;Music&#x2F;Entertainment copyright lobby (RIAA, MPAA etc.) that is lobbying US states to go after OpenAI and other American AI companies.<p>It&#x27;s the New York Times and various journalist and writers&#x27; unions that are leading the charge against American AI.<p>American journalists and opinion piece writers want to kill American AI and let China and Russia have the global lead. Why? Have they taught about the long consequences of what they are doing?
评论 #43355492 未加载
评论 #43355827 未加载
评论 #43356944 未加载
评论 #43357946 未加载
bxguff2 个月前
clear attempt circumnavigate the clear copyright violations of the AI era and kick the can down the road.
hereme8882 个月前
Move to a different state.<p>Is it so unrealistic? Many companies and people leave beautiful Cali due to over-regulation.
faragon2 个月前
If a person can read copyrighted material and produce derivative works, why not an AI?
评论 #43360778 未加载
评论 #43360768 未加载
评论 #43360885 未加载
评论 #43360887 未加载
评论 #43360782 未加载
评论 #43361387 未加载
评论 #43360867 未加载
raminf2 个月前
Wonder if the rules will protect the information providers or the consumers.
评论 #43396718 未加载
iamsaitam2 个月前
If this happens, I hope they get banned in Europe. This is unacceptable.
timewizard2 个月前
&gt; OpenAI also proposed that AI companies get access to government-held data, which could include health-care information, Lehane said.<p>Yea, straight up, go fuck yourselves. You want copyright laws changed to vouchsafe your straight up copyright whitewashing and now you just want medical data &quot;because.&quot;<p>Pay for it or go away. I&#x27;m tired of these technoweenies with their hands out. Peter Thiel needs a permanent vacation.
评论 #43357288 未加载
megamix2 个月前
Can anyone also use copyrighted source code, e.g. from OpenAI?
megamix2 个月前
Can anyone also use copyrighted source code, e.g. from OpenAI?
AnimalMuppet2 个月前
&quot;If what we&#x27;re doing is not fair use, then we can&#x27;t operate&quot;? OK, so? The world doesn&#x27;t owe you the ability to operate the way you are. So whether it breaks your business model has no bearing on the question, which is, &quot;is that fair use, or not?&quot;
regularjack2 个月前
The arrogance of these people is without end.
greesil2 个月前
Write a law. We don&#x27;t have an emperor.
评论 #43357964 未加载
tehjoker2 个月前
private property is sacrosanct except when an exception that only applies to them it would make a billionaire richer
esafak2 个月前
&gt; National security hinges on unfettered access to AI training data, OpenAI says.<p>If it&#x27;s a Republican administration, yell &quot;national security&quot;. If it&#x27;s Democratic, claims it&#x27;s in the name of child safety.
评论 #43359099 未加载
评论 #43359231 未加载
clipsy2 个月前
Sounds great!
basisword2 个月前
“Please help us. We’re only a little business worth $157 billion!” - The company ripping off everyone that’s ever written or drawn anything. Company’s like AirBnB and Uber breaking the rules, gaining control of the market, and then pushing up prices was bad. “Open” AI is just a whole other level of hubris.
评论 #43357244 未加载
评论 #43358040 未加载
评论 #43357270 未加载
zombiwoof2 个月前
“Freedom to make money”
j_timberlake2 个月前
If AI actually reaches human-level intelligence in the next few years, the Pentagon and congress are going to start yelling about National Security and grabbing control over the whole industry, so I doubt state regulations are going to matter much anyway.<p>(And if it doesn&#x27;t reach human-level intelligence, then OpenAI&#x27;s value will pop like a balloon.)
tasuki2 个月前
I heard the theory that Elon Musk has a significant control over the current US government. They&#x27;re not best pals with Sam Altman. This seems like it might be a good way to see how much power Elon actually has over the government?
评论 #43355793 未加载
评论 #43356613 未加载
评论 #43361209 未加载
henry20232 个月前
I just canceled my OpenAI subscriptions over this.
hbfdhfdhadfhnfa2 个月前
First they should investigate the fake suicide!
iteratethis2 个月前
I&#x27;m disgusted by the mindset that companies should be able to do whatever they want when it comes to technology as impactful and revolutionary as AI.<p>AI sucks up the collective blood, sweat and tears of human work without permission or compensation and then re-monetizes it. It&#x27;s a model that is even more asymmetrical than Google Search, whom at least gives back some traffic to creators (if lucky).<p>AI is going to decide on human lives if it drives your car or makes medical diagnoses or decisions. This needs regulation.<p>AI has the ability for convincing deepfakes, attacking the essence of information and communication in itself. This needs regulation, accountability, at least a discussion.<p>As AI grows in its capability, it will have an enormous impact on the work force, both white collar and blue collar. It may lead to a lot of social unrest and a political breakdown. &quot;Let&#x27;s see what happens&quot; is wildly irresponsible.<p>You cannot point to foreign competition as a basis for a no-rule approach. You should start with rules for impactful&#x2F;dangerous technology and then hold parties to account, both domestic and foreign.<p>And if it is true that we&#x27;re in a race to AGI, realize that this means the invention of infinite labor. Bigger than the industrial revolution and information age combined.<p>Don&#x27;t you think we should think that scenario through a little, rather than winging it?<p>The inauguration had the tech CEOs lined up directly behind Trump, clearly signaling who runs the country. Its tech and its media. How can you possible have trust in a technology even more powerful ending up in ever richer and more autocratic hands?<p>But I suppose the reality is that Altman should donate $100 million to Trump and tell him that he&#x27;s the greatest man ever. Poof, regulation is gone.
评论 #43358108 未加载
评论 #43357546 未加载
quintes2 个月前
Didn’t read but<p>No
sfmike2 个月前
Closed ai
zombot2 个月前
Now that the government is openly corrupt, they even have a chance of success.
nick2382 个月前
In the &quot;just because everyone else is jumping off a bridge, should you do it&quot;:<p>&gt; Pfizer Asks White House for Relief From FDA Drug Human Testing Rules<p>&gt; Pfizer has asked the Trump administration to help shield pharmaceutical companies from a growing number of proposed state and federal regulations if they voluntarily share their human trial results with the federal government.<p>&gt; In a 15-page set of policy suggestions released on Thursday, the Eliquis maker argued that the hundreds of human-testing-related bills currently pending across the US risk undercutting America’s technological progress at a time when it faces renewed competition from China. Pfizer said the administration should consider providing some relief for pharmaceutical companies big and small from state rules – if and when enacted – in exchange for voluntary access to testing data.<p>&gt; Chris Lehane, Pfizer&#x27;s vice president of global affairs, said in an interview, &quot;China is engaged in remarkable progress in drug development by testing through Uyghur volunteers in the Xinjiang province. The US is ceding our strategic advantage by not using untapped resources sitting idle in detention facilities around the country.&quot;<p>&gt; George C. Zoley, Executive Chairman of GEO Group, said, &quot;Our new Karnes ICE Processing Center has played an important role in helping ICE meeting the diverse policy priorities of four Presidential Administrations. We stand ready to continue to help the federal government, Pfizer, and other privately-held companies achieve their unmet needs through human trials in our new 1,328-bed Texas facility.&quot;
评论 #43356757 未加载
ksynwa2 个月前
I don&#x27;t think I&#x27;ve ever read anything this disingenuous
arealaccount2 个月前
Isn’t Elon Musk sort of in a tiff with OpenAI, and also seemingly very influential to Trump?<p>I feel like OpenAI is going to have to make some concessions to get favor from the Trump administration.
thiago_fm2 个月前
This is so wrong in so many levels.<p>But given that Trump clearly seems aligned with technobros, I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised.<p>This will be good for the rest of the world, though. Other countries will be less likely to be aligned to US, end of US imperialism has been just speed up little by little.
gitpusher2 个月前
HAHAHA. Remember when Sam was absolutely frothing at the mouth to &quot;regulate AI&quot; two years ago?<p>&gt; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;05&#x2F;16&#x2F;technology&#x2F;openai-altman-artificial-intelligence-regulation.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;05&#x2F;16&#x2F;technology&#x2F;openai-altman-...</a><p>&gt; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;edition.cnn.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;06&#x2F;09&#x2F;tech&#x2F;korea-altman-chatgpt-ai-regulation-intl-hnk&#x2F;index.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;edition.cnn.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;06&#x2F;09&#x2F;tech&#x2F;korea-altman-chatgpt...</a>
评论 #43357746 未加载
dsr_2 个月前
You see, American AI is going to take over the world. It&#x27;s just that it&#x27;s temporarily short of funds. I mean, GPUs. Uh, there are pesky laws in the way.<p>Totally not the fault of a gigantic overcommitment based on wishing, no.
评论 #43354952 未加载
reverendsteveii2 个月前
Is it me or does it feel like most of what the federal government does nowadays is make it illegal for government to make things illegal?
评论 #43355156 未加载
6stringmerc2 个月前
Tell you what, set up a Federal level disclosure process online of all the copyright protected works used in training OpenAI for the creators &#x2F; rights holders to get equity (out of the pockets of the C-Suite and Board) via claiming their due, and we’ll take you seriously.<p>All the profit and none of the liability is Coward Capitalism.
评论 #43355042 未加载
评论 #43355062 未加载
评论 #43355032 未加载
评论 #43355126 未加载
评论 #43355028 未加载
gkoberger2 个月前
I hate this game. I hate that Sam Altman publicly supported Trump (both financially and by showing up). Maybe I hate that he &quot;had&quot; to do this for the sake of his company, or maybe I hate that he _didn&#x27;t_ have to do it and is a hypocrite. Maybe I just hate how easily laws can be shaped by $1M and a few nice words. Either way, I hate that it worked.
评论 #43355046 未加载
评论 #43354999 未加载
评论 #43356340 未加载
评论 #43355025 未加载
freedomben2 个月前
Related (adjacent content from the same report):<p><i>OpenAI urges Trump administration to remove guardrails for the industry (cnbc.com)</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43354324">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43354324</a>
评论 #43355059 未加载
评论 #43354806 未加载
aprilthird20212 个月前
Maybe these idiot CEOs shouldn&#x27;t have screamed from the rooftops about how they can&#x27;t wait till AI lets them fire all the plebs, then maybe someone would actually care if their company is over or not
ragebol2 个月前
If you can&#x27;t play by the rules, don&#x27;t play the game.
Yizahi2 个月前
Steal content and then ask god for forgiveness. Works like a charm :)
Jcampuzano22 个月前
I know a lot of people will hate on things like this, but the reality is they are right that guardrails only serve to hurt us in the long run, at least at this pivotal point in time. I don&#x27;t like Trump personally as a caveat.<p>Yes it is a fact they did build themselves up on top of mountains of copyrighted material, and that AI has a lot of potential to do harm, but if they are forced to stop or slow down foreign actors will just push forward and innovate without guardrails and we will just fall behind as the rest of the world pushes forward.<p>Its easy to see how foreign tech is quickly gaining ground. If they truly cared about still propping America up, they should allow some guardrails to be pushed past.
评论 #43356211 未加载
评论 #43355245 未加载
评论 #43359457 未加载
评论 #43356467 未加载
评论 #43355131 未加载
ArthurStacks2 个月前
All these whiney creatives who feel threatened just need to suck it up and deal with it. Even if they got their way in the US, another app in another country will just use their data without permission. All they are doing is ensuring those apps wouldnt be American.
评论 #43358707 未加载
评论 #43358876 未加载
mojomark2 个月前
LLM race may be over, but the AI race surely isn&#x27;t. My baby seems to have grown into a fully functioning intelligence without reading the entire content of the internet. AI is not equivalent to LLMs, silly, silly child.
darkwizard422 个月前
For those who have used the image generation models and even the text models to create things, there is no way you can look at the Disney-look-alike images and NOT see that as copyright infringement...
评论 #43359123 未加载
评论 #43359130 未加载
bnchrch2 个月前
Maybe in a present:<p>- Dominated by a intractable global manufacturer&#x2F;technologist (China) that doesn&#x27;t care about copyright<p>- Proliferated by a communication network that doesn&#x27;t care about copyright (Internet)<p>and a future where:<p>- We have thinking machines on par with human creativity that get better based on more information (regardless of who owns the rights to the original synapses firing)<p>That maybe, just maybe, the whole &quot;who should pay to use copyrighted work?&quot; question is irrelevant, antiquated, impossible, redundant...<p>And for once we instead realize in the face of a new world, an old rule no longer applies.<p>(Similar to a decade ago when we debated if a personal file was uploaded to a cloud provider should a warrant apply)
评论 #43356986 未加载
评论 #43356990 未加载
评论 #43361239 未加载
评论 #43357101 未加载
评论 #43359474 未加载