Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI
- capevace - 10007 sekunder sedanI‘m not even sure what the argument for banning Chinese models/open weights even is supposed to be?
1. if it’s to stop hackers doing hacking things with „uncontrollable models“ then, well… they’re already doing something illegal to begin with, why would they care about breaking another law running these models?
2. if it’s to stop foreign actors, then that ban would not apply to them anyway
3. it’s not stopping distillation either, Chinese labs are already banned from using US frontier models and look at how good that is working
I don’t get it. Am I missing something? The only thing a ban would do is protect the American market from further downward price pressure on inference, protecting VC investors in the short term. But thats also an admittance that the American labs can’t compete on merit anymore, and should by itself also limit the viability of the idea that all those VC billions will ever make a return? In any case this would be something benefitting only a very few for a short time (labs + investors).
Someone please enlighten me what the actual argument here is, cause I can’t see it.
- fbrncci - 760 sekunder sedanLiving outside of the US (and EU). I’m in the process of launching an agent assisted automated pentesting and authorized offensive security service. I’m using open weights models to execute the entire audit. So lets for a moment entertain the idea that the US somehow locks open weights. How are they going to stop such audits or actual attackers? A competing service in the US simple won’t be able to execute the same level of audits because many of the models refuse following penetration and offensive security testing instructions. An actual attacker is not going to limit itself to those models either. Why would anyone serious about security then limit itself too.
In the end, as a non-US entity; how would the US even stop me from providing services to US companies in private? Well I have a US LLC now, but the moment they become serious about this it takes me a few weeks to incorporate in HK or SG.
- GodelNumbering - 12872 sekunder sedanProprietary model weights are IP, their outputs are not IP and I can't imagine a court decision that would rule otherwise because that would set an extremely far reaching and dangerous precedent, even for American businesses.
I don't think distillation as 'stealing IP' has any legal legs. They can probably claim violation of ToS at best because the terms of use do prohibit use for training rival models.
- vkaku - 10929 sekunder sedanRead this thread when you get the time:
https://x.com/_vkaku/status/2080352797606744209
Open Data+Open Models gives everyone else an advantage and bringing regulatory capture here should be appealed and brought to the FTC and the courts to challenge such regulations.
Startups need better than this whole lock down into four overvalued frontier models in the US sort of thing
- avaer - 1427 sekunder sedanBesides serving no purpose other than an attempt to enforce software by fiat (which would hurt legitimate business, make US AI companies noncompetitive, and do nothing to stop illegitimate use)... it's literally impossible to enforce.
There's a million loopholes (secret distillation so it's no longer foreign, serving mystery model from different jurisdiction, putting it in your basement and not telling anyone). And you bet the motivation and money is there to jump through these hoops.
- WillPostForFood - 10782 sekunder sedanBut the idea of a blanket ban on Chinese open-weight models was not seriously discussed.
Article should probably put the above higher in the story.
- zarzavat - 9625 sekunder sedanSomeone explain to me how the US would stop people from using Chinese models?
Anyone in Europe can download and run a Chinese model and serve it up on the open internet to people in the US. What can the US do about that? The only thing the US can maybe do is ban exports of high powered GPUs to the EU. However the EU can retaliate by banning export of ASML machines to the US, so I don't think the US has that card to play.
- asawfofor - 721 sekunder sedanReminds me of American drug import restrictions so that pharma can get recoup its R&D expenses from Americans who pay higher prescription drug prices
- 3eb7988a1663 - 17600 sekunder sedanIf there were ever a sign I need to get mirroring, this is it.
What are the best Chinese models on HuggingFace today? Bucket by ideal RAM: <16GB, <32GB, <96, <256, 256+
Text generation, image generation, TTS, etc
- shixinhb - 9794 sekunder sedanYou don't need an archive of huggingface. Instead you can use the Chinese version of huggingface with all Chinese models - https://www.modelscope.ai/models
- mmaunder - 9251 sekunder sedanThe letter really dances around the issue that we don’t want to see a ban on the release and use of open weights foreign or domestic models in the US. If we do it will leave us at a severe competitive disadvantage in a global context. Many of us would consider moving our businesses out of the US to avoid being mired in a stagnant pond that reeks of government capture by a handful of corrupt laggards whose core competency is regulating away competition and killing domestic innovation.
- DrBenCarson - 9191 sekunder sedanRemember when OpenAI were wise enough to know OpenAI should be…open?
Greed will cost America the entire AI market at this rate
- jgbuddy - 16887 sekunder sedanThe point of open weight models is that this is not possible, companies will be built by taking 'contraband' chinese open weight models and marketing as something from the US
- andai - 17780 sekunder sedanDon't model weights fall under free speech?
- godwinson__4-8 - 4122 sekunder sedanAs bad as it will be no one will be surprised when this happens. This administration does not care about the law. The president wants to keep using his position to make a generational bag. This is the same leader of the free world peddling shitcoin.
Everyone knows the game someone is going to cut him a check and suddenly the Chinese models are going to be a national security threat. The only saving grace may be that when it comes to China the president has shown himself to be a paper tiger.
The way he waddled around Zhongnanhai after embarrassing himself in the trade war and the Iran war was truly something. For whatever reason, Xi (like Putin) has him scared. But if enough sinophobes with deep pockets cut a check, it will not be surprising. It may even benefit China to watch the United States continue to attempt closing itself off instead of competing.
- throwatdem12311 - 6033 sekunder sedanBlocking Chinese models would just be regulatory capture by another name. If we want OpenAI and Anthropic to improve they need to compete not just with eachother but with foreign labs too.
I don’t know why anyone would think giving Mango Mussolini the power to decide what AI models they can use is a good idea.
- DivingForGold - 6926 sekunder sedan"The Bitterness of Poor Quality Remains Long After the Sweetness of a Low Price is Forgotten"
Benjamin Franklin
- MeteorMarc - 14317 sekunder sedanWould it even be possible to ban open weight models, given all the ways they can be used in finetuned models or online services, also in 3rd countries?
- - 5628 sekunder sedan
- sixdimensional - 16128 sekunder sedanI think that we humans still have a really tough time differentiating and classifying between public and private goods (and everything in between) from an economic sense.
Unfortunately, capitalism of today appears to find public goods and strong, public, healthy public goods to be undesirable investments. Yet, it seems inevitable that some things trend that direction.
I feel if we could get a better handle on what goods fall into which category, and find ways to make those things sustainable and even grow, the situation could get better.
I'm speaking purely from observations here but it also looks like in some ways, the "invisible hand of the economy" (i.e. Adam Smith) might sort these things out by itself, albeit, painfully.
We could look at the fact that LLMs were mostly created from the public domain (except when they were not), and the resulting products/services (expensive to create/operate, benefits a huge swath of humanity, has all kinds of externality issues) as something that perhaps should again almost be considered as a public good.
If we look at the struggles LLM/AI companies have had with legal structure choices, such as nonprofit, for profit, etc and pricing (e.g. do we make it accessible at a loss? Do we extract huge profits?) as a kind of moral dilemma of classifying this new economic good (LLM-based AI).
In the US, the government has been taking investment interests in some tech companies, and recent proposals even include establishing sovereign wealth funds around AI/LLM. I think this is further evidence that the system is trying to figure out how to classify these new economic goods and corporations.
- mark_l_watson - 5776 sekunder sedanWhy? The current administration is doing such a fine job protecting the investments of a few hundred wealthy people, and not caring about the economy of the country.
The combination of a wide range of model sizes and capabilities, with good engineering choices as which to use for what applications, that is the way.
- aslkalska - 17198 sekunder sedanside note : I wish they had an actual link to the companies instead of just their names in https://littletech.org/membership
- Upvoter33 - 442 sekunder sedan"US government bans floating point numbers"
- leni536 - 7357 sekunder sedanEnglish is not my first language, but to me the construct "to urge not to do something" in the title feels off. I think I only saw it without the negative, with some implied urgency... And now that I spelled it out, "urge" and "urgent" are probably related.
- giancarlostoro - 18076 sekunder sedanI think this would be foolish, a more sound strategy is to focus on critical infrastructure and defense not using models that are "open" but they're really just binary blobs. We have models here in the states like OLMo that could receive more investing to attempt to bring them up to par with some of the frontier open-weight models, removing a lot of these concerns.
- firefoxd - 9199 sekunder sedanNote that a ban doesn't mean you can't download it anymore. Just that if you do so it will be considered illegal.
A competitor can simply accuse you of using a chinese model and throw you completely off rails with an investigation. Or when the government can't get a valid search warrant for a separate crime, they can get you on suspicion if using a chinese model.
- a_paddy - 9580 sekunder sedanDidn't Hugging Face have to resort to the Chinese open weight GLM model to figure out that an OpenAI was hacking it?
- comrade1234 - 6253 sekunder sedanWill I get my $1.90 back from deepseek? I put $2.00 on my account a couple of months ago and it's taken me this long to use $0.10 worth of tokens.
- andsoitis - 7691 sekunder sedanWhy isn’t there a competitive US or European open weights model?
- johnnyApplePRNG - 9607 sekunder sedanAmerica seems to be heavily invested in making the entire population as dumb as rocks so this aligns with everything I'd assume from America and the current administration in general tbh.
Not sure why this is even news.
The man in charge literally hates intellects.
- tencentshill - 18197 sekunder sedanWe must all hoard all available models before they get taken down. Is anyone archiving huggingface?
- jmtrevarton - 12548 sekunder sedanDoes this include Deepseek? I don't know if that would crush me, but it would definitely hurt.
- officialchicken - 17022 sekunder sedanWhy jump to complex technical and policy solutions when an Open Weights AI champion trophy, in solid gold, is being requested by the Commander in Thief?
- Towaway69 - 9429 sekunder sedanWhat happened to free trade and globalisation? Oooohhh only when it serves the west. What happened to the invisible hand of the market? Oooohhh it only when it serves the west.
Well damn that the Chinese are playing the game “capitalism” better than the west.
The last time this happen, the west just forced opium on China. Ironically it was the west that forced China to open its markets in the first place.
History just keeps repeating like a broken record.
- culi - 10977 sekunder sedanIf there's a "ban", it'd only really affect corporations right? It'd be difficult to stop indie devs and pirates from downloading the models
- rustcleaner - 7597 sekunder sedanCan't stop the bittorrent, won't stop the bittorrent!
There's also I2PSnark, Hyphanet, and others!
- anonbuddy - 15999 sekunder sedanthis would actually be big win for non US founders
- tancop - 17944 sekunder sedan[flagged]
- SirHackalot - 3573 sekunder sedanNever seen capitalists this afraid of competition. Same story with Chinese cars… We can’t have cheap, and objectively superior EVs because of protectionist policies towards Musk and his ilk.
- analognoise - 3504 sekunder sedanBanning Chinese open source AI is “quick war with Iran” levels of strategic thinking.
- jMyles - 14905 sekunder sedanEven more bizarre than debating over whether we can stop the free flow of information across communications surfaces (we can't)... is the notion that this one person - a highly ineffectual occupant of an office whose relevance is rapidly decreasing... is somehow in charge of it.
- kennywinker - 18363 sekunder sedanUnder what authority could he block access?
- Liwink - 9353 sekunder sedanopen weight models are not free models. Inference providers should share a meaningful percentage of revenue with the model companies. In fact, open weight model seems a solid business model - they can leverage existing cloud infra for distribution without spending massive CAPEX.
- intheitmines - 17354 sekunder sedanHow do you ban numbers?
- - 7866 sekunder sedan
- FpUser - 14753 sekunder sedan>"banning Americans from downloading Chinese open-weight models" - land of free is being even more so
- ReptileMan - 7956 sekunder sedanAnd how are they supposed to ban them? What Chinese companies release is math.
- npodbielski - 17068 sekunder sedanSo Y Combinator signed it too? But this is HN, Y combinator website. I think I am missing something because I never read any opinion like 'we should ban Chinese models'.
- bilbo0s - 17769 sekunder sedanI tell everyone whenever I get a chance, download any open weights models you can as soon as possible.
Buy extra hardrives. Borrow them. Do whatever you have to do.
But to paraphrase Éomer, don't trust to hope, it has abandoned these lands.
- otikik - 16506 sekunder sedanThe turntables do their thing.
- formerly_proven - 17285 sekunder sedanIllegal numbers 2: Electric Trumpaloo
- misiti3780 - 18353 sekunder sedanhe cant shut them off anyways, anyone can just VPN to europe and download them
- feverzsj - 18341 sekunder sedanThe only thing Trump can do is building the US version of GFW, which he knows better than anyone else.
- - 17155 sekunder sedan
- gaws - 15956 sekunder sedan"Nooooo!!! We already laid off half our workforce and got priced out of models from American companies. We need the cheaper models, even risking giving all our data to a foreign adversary, so our big number goes up long enough for us to get acquired!!!"
- jmyeet - 16217 sekunder sedanThe US government exists to protect American capital and the interests of capital owners. I'm not sure why people are still confused by this.
This is about OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX. OpenAI, in particular, is a bet on there being a moat for AI and OpenAI "winning". Chinese models threaten this moat. The CCP has decided that it is in China's national security interests to not have Western companies "own" or "win" AI. These AI giants are large enough that the US government is going to intervene to try and protect this outcome. This is a losing battle.
- - 18285 sekunder sedan
- softwaredoug - 16320 sekunder sedanI see we're doing "too big to fail" again...
- ninjahawk1 - 17470 sekunder sedanThe U.S. does NOT have copyright protections on the data that AI models were and are trained on, it was mass theft. Now all of a sudden, the Chinese are stealing from the thieves and we’re supposed to care?
No one cares, we just want cheaper AI models that are equally as powerful. They’re all thieves regardless.
- bix6 - 14013 sekunder sedan> Almost 200 Silicon Valley companies, including Proton and Y Combinator…On Wednesday, the newly-formed Little Tech Association
YC is little tech? lol wut.
- eggy - 13719 sekunder sedan[flagged]
- chrisnight - 18060 sekunder sedan> the US can “sanction” companies that engage in intellectual property theft.
Peak hypocrisy, US AI companies can train on unlimited intellectual property with 0 rights to it, while Chinese AI companies have to explicitly get the rights to data that isn’t even copyrightable/copyrighted (since AI alone can’t copyright it).
- snootypoot - 17994 sekunder sedan[dead]
- CurbStomper - 14114 sekunder sedan[dead]
- epolanski - 10742 sekunder sedanWhat is this socialism about using non-us open weight ai?
Dystopic.
What next? Some communist open source Finnish operating system?
- SubiculumCode - 18537 sekunder sedan[flagged]
- bethekidyouwant - 16023 sekunder sedan“And they warn that banning Americans from downloading Chinese open-weight models wouldn’t stop their proliferation — but would weaken U.S. startups.”
Well this doesn’t even make sense.
- gdiamos - 17315 sekunder sedanI think we should shut it off. It would force US companies to build open models.
Nördnytt! 🤓