Sure but while studying the etymology of words can do a lot to help you understand them (particularly from a linguistic perspective), its really more important to consider what people mean when they use a word, not where it came from. "Howdy" comes from "How do you do?" and yet nobody treats "Howdy" as a question. If I say "Howdy" to you (which is something I do often), and you answer "Good, how are you," I'm going to give you a weird look.
Its really not that far fetched. Japan has quite a history of copying the aesthetic of things the west does while changing the meaning completely. Christmas is a romantic holiday in Japan, and it is considered fashionable to get married in a church, even though only about 2% of the country is Christian.
Uber famously pulled out of Austin for a year because Austin wanted to require background checks with fingerprinting on Uber drivers. I don't really like their style of "plowing through" regulation.
If the thesis that "If anybody builds it, everyone dies" is true, or has any chance of becoming true, then it is the logical thing to do. As Geoffrey Hinton said, "If you want to know what it's like not to be the apex intelligence, ask a chicken."
The current project I am developing with AI is so bloated that I've spent more time and tokens cleaning up the repo (to the tune of tens of thousands of lines removed) than actually creating it in the first place. AI is very very happy to create a mess.
The law is not software. It would be very easy to argue that a streaming stick that automatically downloads malware is no different from one that came with malware.
Online it still seems like for the most part if you buy from something a bit more specialty (e.g. McMaster, Digikey, etc) you still get really good vetting and high quality stuff, but amazon is more than happy to be filled with absolute garbage.
Nope, it was actual 1.6.4 (and probably beyond that too). It wasn't amazing but consistent 30fps with some ATI card from the time. It had a Pentium D of some sort, can't remember exactly what.
The same reason gambling is. No, I'm serious. Theres a psychological phenomenon where things which are reliably positive are less enjoyable (or addictive) than something that is disappointing sometimes and positive other times. Writing software is like that in that things don't work, then they don't work, then they still don't work, then suddenly they do.
It is interesting how Linux and FOSS in general is just providing a better UX these days. I have to think its because without profit motives, people do things for passion and maybe that leads people to write code the right way instead of the "it works" way.
I do wonder if their "fair use" argument preempts them from actually being able to claim copyright over the model weights, since it can be argued that the vast majority of what the model is is itself a remix of everything else. Maybe their RLHF, system prompts, architecture and training techniques can be considered copyrightable, but maybe most of the data can't.
The only good arguments I see against open weight AI also apply to closed AI. And regardless, the box is open, nobody can stop it even if stopping it was a good thing.
You can totally mark up your books. No issue with that, if you like it. I don't personally, but I don't see why someone shouldn't do it. Now should you sell those books? Probably not.
Intel had something very close to a monopoly for a long time. ARM wasn't taken seriously for desktop or server applications, and AMD was unable to compete with Intel's top-end CPUs until Zen (and with it Ryzen and Epyc) came around.
Great, that way is called copyright. The author has the right to control who has the rights to distribute their work, and can require compensation in exchange for that right; what economists refer to as "selling".
Its a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy (that happens to be absurdly profitable for certain people). AGI is inevitable, so we need to gear our entire economy towards building it first, so we're doing that, so AGI is inevitable.