this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2026
266 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

86661 readers
3466 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Classic mega corporations. Unable to adapt and innovate, so they just acquire smaller competitors, and lobby to get the bigger ones banned. It's depressing how often it works out perfectly for them.

[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Because they can't compete.

Tick-tock, motherfuckers.

https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-subprime-data-center-crisis/

[–] notso@feddit.org 21 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

That must be this free market everybody keeps talking about.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Oh, just wait when all these AI companies ask for a government bailout... Free market in action...

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Young companies innovate. Old companies litigate

If you have to lobby the government to protect your company from smaller competition then your business model sucks.

I suspect, however, that they're not going to be able to just stop Chinese offerings from being downloaded and run locally. And that is going to do most of the stuff for which people are turning to AI.

[–] eicker@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Exactly. It’s much easier to regulate an API than software people can download and run on their own hardware. ~~Once~~ Since capable open weight AI models exist, they spread much like Linux or other open source software: mirrors appear, forks emerge, and improvements compound. Governments can make access less convenient, but preventing global distribution altogether is a far harder problem than restricting a hosted service.

[–] RabbitBBQ@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They have also been claiming Chinese models are stealing their work and intellectual property by distilling the frontier models. Which is ironic considering they stole the works of all of humanity to create it in the first place.

[–] Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

But they are stealing what we stole first. It's not fair!

[–] _Nemo_@lemmy.ml 131 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (7 children)

"Using free Chinese models that you can run locally and offline is a security risk. People and businesses high on AI should be forced to use our expensive cloud-based models that funnel all their data through our servers and can be turned off or price-hiked by us at any moment!"

[–] b161@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago

“Trust us! We’re a bunch of deranged genocidal pedophiles who want to put all the poors in death camps! We’re the good guys!”

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And spied on to extract personal data we can sell.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Trade secrets, too. Frontier providers have everything they need to help you, take what worked, then help your competitors.

[–] terabyterex@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

this article doesnt address local models. this is about kimmi k3. i had to look because its very hard to restrict local ran software

kimi k3 is going to release on huggingface tomorrow. it will be open weight, assuming nothing gets between now and then. they just wanted a short exclusivity period.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] JTode@lemmy.world 51 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Never has it been more clear what Capitalism is. It has fuckall to do with freedom and everything to do with sharecropping.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 days ago

According to Karl Marx, this is what capitalism becomes. Eventually, the ownership class captures government and turns regulation to benefit the companies that capture it, and those companies outside that loop cannot compete and die off.

And then it gets to where one player owns all the properties and the other players are going bankrupt one by one.

But US history shows us the capitalist will exploit labor by any means they can, ultimately pushing them into bonded servitude. (We don't like to call it slavery, but it's slavery.)

[–] ExFed@programming.dev 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The current economic regime is less like "capitalism" and more like "feudalism with corporations."

[–] JTode@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

That depends on what you are calling Capitalism. I'm all for free markets and such, but Capitalism was never anti-feudal - first thing the Burghers did was marry their kids into Noble families. It was strictly about adding "man with enough money that he doesn't work" to the protected class.

[–] terabyterex@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

it has nothing to do with either. its about private ownership. thats it. thats all it has ever been and thinking the government owning companies is better is silly.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

The government owning companies is better as shown by the countless examples of product and service degradation and inflation following privatization campaigns in the UK, Canada and elsewhere.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Funnily enough, OpenAI signed the open weights letter too.

Sam Altman would do literally anything, say anything to make OpenAI look good. He would sacrifice his grandmother if he could, and I’m not one to say that lightly.

[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

There's a solid video that describes in good detail what kind of person he is. It's probably the exact kind you expect, but now you have reliable sources for it!

Link: https://youtu.be/_eYTkvZqbnQ

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

That psychopath would sell her for a nickel

[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

“OpenAI” signed the open weight pledge, which only makes sense given the company name and original values. They’ve had gpt-oss for quite a while, but it feels like a pretty half-assed effort for the purposes of virtue signaling. I’m not holding my breath for them to release an open weight model on par with GLM, Kimi, or Qwen.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 days ago

They've abandoned their openness ever since they saw the widespread success of ChatGPT and GPT3. They were really only "Open"AI around the GPT-GPT2 era.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 30 points 2 days ago

"Help! We're dying and need a captive market to survive!"

[–] eicker@lemmy.world 46 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Using security as a convenient tool to sideline foreign competition is a slippery slope, especially from companies that built their own success on open research.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 41 points 3 days ago (2 children)

“Security” is the go-to excuse for every atrocity under capitalism.

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago

And “the kids”.

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 3 points 2 days ago

Untill you want to protect consumers from something capitalists are doing. Then it's all about not limiting innovation. In reality , innovation translates into additional fees, subscriptions, dynamic pricing and that kind of stuff.

[–] Ludicrous0251@piefed.zip 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Seems to be working for the American auto industry (for now).

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

In a competitive market, there'd no longer be a US auto industry, except Tesla, and it wouldn't survive much longer without massive subsidies.

[–] eicker@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Perhaps. The difference with regard to OWAI, however, is that US companies have no alternatives to Chinese suppliers.

[–] Lanske@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The rest of the world should restrict US AI

[–] eicker@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That’s not necessary: as the Open Weight AI models from the US are rather poor, nobody wants them anyway. 🤷

[–] example@reddthat.com 8 points 2 days ago (4 children)

the comment you replied to didn't mention open weight

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago

"Think of the children!!"

Just turn the internet tube from china-ai off, how can it be that hard?!!

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The shovel maker disagrees. This gon be gud.gif 😂

[–] terabyterex@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

jensen knows the future is local ai. his new consumer ai chips coming out this year will hurt openai/anthropic. most people font need data center level ai

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)
[–] terabyterex@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

these. there are some good youtibe videos on it. every pc manufacturer from dell to asus, msi etc that will have mkdels https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/ai-on-rtx/

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh that rings a bell now. It sounds like they won't be super fast for serious local work but they would be an interesting alt to AMD's unified memory platform.

[–] terabyterex@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

we will see, but remember, this is the start. you cant argue that nvidia builds good hardware

load more comments
view more: next ›