> It can read the code? Historical discussions around it? Commit histories?
And if everyone bunkers up and all that open content dries up starting in 2026, let's say, what happens?
And if everyone bunkers up and all that open content dries up starting in 2026, let's say, what happens?
Many kinds of technology faced this kind of tragedy of the commons argument in the past and it never bears out. Printing presses copied manuscripts, search engines copied and indexed web pages, open-source software was incorporated into commercial products, Wikipedia repackaged knowledge produced elsewhere.
In almost all cases the total amount of creation increases because the technology lowered costs, expanded audiences, or created new forms of value. The speed of creation of new 'View Source' outpaces the number of people pulling back.
But this doesn't lower the cost of learning and writing CSS, it just scoops up some of it and offers that cheaply, and even that only because it's offered below cost. If anything I'd say it increases the cost, because now you don't get paid to get and be good at what an LLM is supposedly good enough at, and have less free time to do it anyway. You may not even have a computer because your current one broke and you can't afford a new one.
That is not the dynamic with LLM. You see LLM output, but original creator is hidden. And if you write your own, no one will find it. Worst, other people will tell you "LLM could have write it" in reaction ... so people wont bother.
> search engines copied and indexed web pages
Notably, search engines sent people toward web pages. And when search engines stopped doing that and started to copy content, those original pages started to die out.
> Printing presses copied manuscripts
Printing press made dissemination easier. It is an equivalent of early internet, not of LLM.
> open-source software was incorporated into commercial products
Commercial product using open source library had different user then the library it is using. And crucially, it is not hiding that library from the library user.
> Wikipedia repackaged knowledge produced elsewhere
Yes, and we collectively create less encyclopedias. They are not worth writing and checking for correctness anymore, so we don't do that all that much anymore.
Imagine you have a 4B model and keep an equal size corpus of search stubs, small MD documents linking to hubs, feeds and search engines for millions of topics. You can use the LLM to read the stub and perform the search for you, all orchestrated locally, with greater privacy and independence. You can dis-intermediate the search chokepoint now. You can set the criteria for what to include, exclude, how to rank and present the results.
This works because good entry points for any topic change slowly over time. The construction of search stubs is trivial with existing AI agents, and can be shared as open source. A few GB for the model, a few for the search routing layer, and you got a sovereign local agent.
If this holds, access control shifts from whatever Google thinks maximizes profit to whatever the community thinks has value.
But most crutially, what you described is not an actual thing people do.
A lot of open-source software was supported by developers having stable well-paying jobs that didn't burn them out and afforded them enough free time to work on passion projects on the side, so that even if their company wasn't directly supporting their OSS development, there was still an indirect link.
Not only is this likely to increasingly change in the future as people need to spend more time navigating the disruption AI will have on labor, it already visibly has been changing over the past year.
One of the top posts on HN today is someone leaving open source and tech completely to work at Home Depot -- while this is an extreme case it isn't wholly unique to what I'm seeing in many places since 2025.
It seems like a lot of the underlying sentiment which was driving that was to contribute to the world and make things better for our fellow people.
Working on OSS software sure doesn't feel as rewarding in the last few years, so I've personally stepped back from 99% of what I do. As have more public people that have worked on OSS for a long time.
Do you think creating the orders of magnitude of content the internet produced organically and which LLM creators are stealing is cheap? If they actually have to pay for content creation while competing with content creators on the you know, content creation front via LLM-generation, the entire business model of LLMs collapses.
You can't have the mountains of data needed for LLMs in the decades to come, if your LLMs put the writers and artists out of work.
We will see how this shakes out in the coming years, as Anthropic, OpenAI & co file for IPO or run out of private funding. Grok is already on the ropes as seen from the SpaceX IPO.
And yes, we will see how it shakes out, Anthropic or OpenAI may collapse just as netscape did, but I hope your implication is not "AI in general will be extinguished like the blockchain" or something
Nothing was set in stone. The way many historical things happened the way they did was due to accident, sheer chance.
> And yes, we will see how it shakes out, Anthropic or OpenAI may collapse just as netscape did, but I hope your implication is not "AI in general will be extinguished like the blockchain" or something
I think the current LLM economy will collapse, leaving behind a few survivors. There will be widespread adoption of cheap OSS LLMs and of more limited, economically viable functionality provided by people with deep pockets like Google. As LLM economics start making more sense, LLMs will be everywhere, once the hardware becomes cheaper and more available.
Regarding lawsuits, do you think Disney & co will take this lying down? The freaking DMCA - an American law - is enforced <<internationally>>. It will take a long time but LLMs will be domesticated.
I agree with you on a technical level and even in a non-cynical "humanity really can rally and change things that seem insurmountable" but you have read way more history than I have. All I know is you have such a frantic geopolitical aspect to this, and such a staggering amount of funding and addressable market, which means unlike blockchain this is both powered by business _and_ government (no government would give up control of the money supply, shocking to me that people believe this), that I see zero path to winding anything down.
> I think the current LLM economy will collapse, leaving behind a few survivors. There will be widespread adoption of cheap OSS LLMs and of more limited, economically viable functionality provided by people with deep pockets like Google. As LLM economics start making more sense, LLMs will be everywhere, once the hardware becomes cheaper and more available.
Cheap OSS LLMs are used everywhere, all the time. They are great, and with subsidies from say China, they could even be competitive with frontier models, but that model of the world requires this mysterious OSS development running at a big big loss. It takes almost a billion dollars to train a frontier model. For many many cases, you do not need frontier model performance. When I do say video captioning, I use small OSS VL models.
Is your theory predicated on OSS models filling some sort of performance gap between the frontier? Or a compromise for less spend at a lower performance? What to you doesn't make sense about LLM economics? Like, LLM's are everywhere. If you think "oh people will just settle for slightly less performance for cheaper" that should have already played out, we've had the same dynamics at every scale: frontier performance is expensive, but then that same performance will cost roughly 10x less in 1 years time. But you don't see people stopping at like GPT-4 and not adopting the frontier models of today.
I think you're right about the value of OSS LLMs but I don't see what would change the calculus to make frontier models somehow less important. It's like in the 90's when we were like "1 GIGABYTE OF RAM? how will that ever be necessary!?!?" and sure, you don't need 1 GB of ram for everything! We have embedded systems. But it's not like there isn't a booming market for >> 1 GB memory modules.
> Regarding lawsuits, do you think Disney & co will take this lying down? The freaking DMCA - an American law - is enforced <<internationally>>. It will take a long time but LLMs will be domesticated.
Not saying lawsuits will be fruitless, I'm sure they will chip something off of the industry, but by now it just won't matter. We're talking about trillions in spend, multiple countries, a government that sees this as a non-negotiable game to win from a geopolitical and military standpoint, and our government knows that they can't execute this themselves despite what I imagine is their distaste for Silicon Valley tech CEOs and their grandstanding. Maybe a lawsuit kneecaps someone, which would be huge, but that doesn't matter for AI generally. Maybe a lawsuit restricts data use, that's fine, these companies have deep pockets for licensing and commissioning datasets; they have opt-in-by-default user flywheels.
We're not such a smart species. It's not like we managed so far. We're just adding unsolved problems, and distract ourselves with even bigger problems. The world could have been fed and clothed by the mid 20th century and we could have solved climate change by the 1980s (talking out of my ass here but with confidence in my general point with that), but instead we now throw everything into the furnace. in the hopes it will create a deus ex machina, like in that very bad Isaac Asimov story. I think we are absolutely capable of lobotomizing ourselves (as a species) like a toddler playing with an electrical socket shocking itself. I don't say this to be snarky, I honestly think we're that unserious and ignorant about what we do and the environment we do it in.
But I also really should look into what you answered about LLM learning from themselves, I heard it mentioned before but I still have no real clue. I will try to rectify that. I mean, I really, really want to be wrong on this, only a monster wouldn't.
I dont think it will be "too late" by any reasonable definition. All those things are learnable and companies that will really need to overcome it, will. But, they wont be open with their knowledge. Learning/training will be expensive and once people acquire it, they wont share it like open sources and programming tech blogs did.