Untitled

What Anthropic is doing requires way more resources than what the Chinese labs are doing. So their complaint is that they do 95% of the work and the Chinese labs do the last 5% and call it their own. An argument can be made that Anthropic is also only doing the last 5% of the work (because the content they are training on was the other 95%) but that's a bit more philosophical.

The conversation here is mostly moral and ethical but the problem here seems to be financial. Anthropic and OpenAi are spending a $$$$ to "distill" human output into an AI model, then others are spending $$ to distill their AI model into a near-equivalent model. This is the same reason IP rights exist. On the surface, something like a patent feels ludicrious and even feels morally wrong. Some guy wrote down the recipe for arranging atoms or bits in a particular way, and now I can't!? However, it's designed to solve the same problem, figuring out and describing the process is much more costly than replicating it.

Because cost of original training >> cost of distilling. It's the same thing that happens with Chinese knockoffs of physical products - it takes a lot of money and R&D time to design a new product, but it's basically free to buy the product, reverse engineer it, and resell it. All the data they originally trained on was available for free on the internet. If the original work was so valuable, it shouldn't be up on the internet for free in the first place imo.

[deleted]

Two wrongs don’t make a right. (If you consider them as wrongs.)