Are you saying Aaron Swartz should have just left a similar paper trail documenting that he believed to do the right thing in the interest of society? I don't believe this would have saved him from the wrath of the copyright industry.

But US labs have been doing it right, while Chinese labs are only distilling from their superior products, right?

... but even if, likely distilled from models that distilled by just illegally grabbing all the content they could get.

... like all LLMs? maybe not the swiss one fully trained on open-data.

That's quite naive. We're looking at 50 years of legacy software running Unix/Linux environments. If the attacker with an LLM finds one in minutes it might take you hours to even comprehend the finding. Guess what the attacker with the LLM will do in that time?

This assumes all the open models are just a result of distilling Anthropic models. Which remains to be proven.

And if they are, the point remains that Anthropic has a brittle product advantage that users and investors should be cautious about.

OpenAI says they're not just distillation. "Some observations on Kimi: 1. It's a very good model! I don't think its performance can be explained away by distillation or anything like that."

If you put any faith in claims made by OpenAI's "Head of Strategic Futures," then it's hard to believe these models are just the result of distillation.

> investors should be cautious about

if they are cautious, what would make them invest in newer bigger models without the expected return? generosity?

Sunk cost fallacy.

So much money has been invested in Anthropic and OpenAI at this point that to declare it a loss and walk away could potentially destroy a lot of VC firms, and a non-trivial chunk of the US Economy.

Sunk cost fallacy is not relevant to future investment.

what an absolute plonker

do you know how ROIC is calculated?

Good luck hiding your huge sunk cost of bilions and billions in there bro. I wish people who had zero understanding of actual finance would never comment about it.

Moreover if they declare their existing assets are bunk, the valuation is marked down, especially after now pricing in failure risk - this is catastrophic for VC's.

Again, bro, just be quiet.

sanest comment here

> Sunk cost fallacy is not relevant to future investment

Outside of future choices, what in the world is sunk cost fallacy in fact relevant to? Do you understand words?