They haven't been stolen; the creators still have them. They've just been copied. It's amazing how much the ethos on this site has shifted over the past decade, away from the hacker idea that "intellectual property" isn't real property, just a means of growing corporate power, and information wants to be free.
It hasn't. The hacker ethos is about openness, individuality, decentralization (among others).
OpenAI is open in what it consumes, not what it outputs.
It makes sense to have protections in place when your other values are threatened.
If "information want's to be free" leads to OpenAI centralizing control over the most advanced AI then will it be worth it?
A solution here would be similar to the GPL: even megacorps can use GPL software, but they have to contribute back. If OpenAI and the rest would be forced to make everything public (if it's trained on open data) then that would be an acceptable compromise.
Yes, the greatest things on the internet have been decentralized - Git, Linux, Wikipedia, open scientific publications, even some forums. We used to passively consume content and internet allowed interaction. We don't want to return to the old days. AI falls into the decentralized camp, the primary beneficiaries are not the providers but the users. We get help of things we need, OpenAI gets a few cents per million tokens, they don't even break even.
I'm sorry, the worlds knowledge now largely accessible by a laymen via LLMs controlled by at most, 5 companies is decentralized? If that statement is true then the world decentralized truly is entirely devoid of meaning at this point.
1. Decentralized technologies you can operate privately, freely, and adapt to your needs: computers, old internet, Linux, git, FireFox, local Wikipedia dump, old standalone games.
2. Centralized technologies that invade privacy, lead to loss of control and manipulation: web search, social networks, mobile phones, Chrome, recent internet, networked games. LLMs fall into the decentralized camp.
You can download a LLM, run it locally, fine-tune it. It is interactive, the most interactive decentralized tech since standalone games.
If you object that LLMs are mostly centralized today (upfront cost of pre-training and OpenAI popularity), I say they are still not monopolies, there are many more LLM providers than search engines and social networks, and the next round of phones and laptops will be capable of local gen-AI. The experience will be seamless, probably easier to adapt than touchscreens were in 2007.
Sure you might not like OpenAI, but maybe some other company comes a long and builds the next magical product using information that is freely available.
I don't care if employees at OpenAI read books from their local library on python. More power to them. I don't even care if they copy the book for reference at work, still fine. But utilizing language at scale as a scarce resource to train models is not that and is not in any way analogous to it.
Public information should should be free for anyone to consume and use how they want.
A truly hilarious sentiment coming from someone making zero effort to actually engage with what I'm saying in favor of parroting back empty platitudes.
You wouldn't download a car.