182
submitted 1 day ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 6 points 7 hours ago

I propose we "pace the frontier" by sinking all three of these mfers into the deepest darkest pit of the sea.

[-] sdfric88@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 hours ago

I agree with lightnsfw

[-] ContactClosure@lemmus.org 8 points 9 hours ago

This "we have to kill the planet first or China will beat us to it" narrative is such bullshit. There's *zero fucking chance" we ever catch up to them in any meaningful metric. Especially now that our schools are churning out brain dead dependents.

[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 1 points 4 hours ago

The US used to have the brain steal advantage were every PhD in the world wished to work in a research institute or university in the US, but I don't think that's true anymore and they're going to start to lose people to Europe and Asia

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 11 points 8 hours ago
[-] shirro@aussie.zone 29 points 19 hours ago

They all got caught in an unsustainable build out. They are all under pressure to find some gentleman's agreement to slow it down so they have more time before investors realize they aren't getting their money back. It is the usual tech scam of fake it til you make it. When you aren't going to make it you need to find excuses and delay.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 hours ago

And the big problem for them is that they have no leverage of Chinese labs, and it's hard to ban open models.

[-] balsoft@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 day ago

There is clearly a push coming from these companies in the past month to present AI as something extremely dangerous. The way I see it, it's just marketing for the industry to keep the grift bubble going a while longer still: (1) there's no such thing as bad press, (2) if it's dangerous it must also be good. IMO public statements like this is just another element in that marketing campaign.

Maybe the bubble is closer to bursting than I imagine and they're trying to stretch it out until the US midterm elections end.

I suspect in reality it's a combination of all those reasons, probably in different amounts for all three.

The bond market turning means they can't borrow money cheaply anymore. They are looking for an excuse to reduce capex.

[-] tired_fedora@lemmy.ml 8 points 16 hours ago

You remember how agreements like this used to be called a cartel and how a country should have a functioning and independent government body to prevent these?

[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 1 day ago

It might also be that Altman and Musk are deliberately lying, intentionally feigning agreement to encourage other models to slow down while they quietly ramp up development.

It seems all the US models want their AI to be the one that becomes hostile, escapes confinement and attempts to dominate the world.

(In reality, they want their own AI to be the one that is able to obediently dominate the world, which is just as bad a scenario for the rest of us.)

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago

I don't see how anything they do can possibly affect what Chinese labs are doing. And that's the only alternative to American labs right now. So, who are they going to convince exactly?

[-] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 4 points 20 hours ago

The point is to get laws passed in the US that create a moat for them as businesses. They don't care about competing with China, they care about competing with the next YC cohort.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 20 hours ago

That's definitely a plausible option, but it's going to be very hard to ban use of open models. They could get use of official Chinese services banned, but justifying why OpenRouter and others can't run them is going to be a lot harder. And there's also a ton of money invested in all these AI companies running on open models now. So, the pushback will be significant.

[-] theneverfox@pawb.social 3 points 16 hours ago

It would be a lot easier to regulate open models if they perform regulatory capture first

Seems like one of several last ditch efforts to keep the bubble going IMO. They're flailing

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 hours ago
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago

i'd say that'd be a worse development for humanity if it ends up obeying the epstein reich

[-] railcar@midwest.social 15 points 1 day ago

This isn't cartel behavior at all

[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 1 day ago

I'm not sure Chinese labs are even going in the same direction as the AI projects in the US. They're working to see what they can do with a (more) reasonable amount of buildout, rather than building data centers from horizon to horizon.

Also, the Chinese are motivated by seeing what AI can do for a larger society. American AI systems are being refined automation and instruments of control, specifically military and national security interests.

Essentially, the US industry is trying to get AI to train a gun on the entire US population.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago

Oh they definitely aren't, there's an interview with Alibaba Cloud founder where he discusses the direction in China. Basically, the goal is to find useful niches for this tech early on, then iterate and improve. They're not chasing AGI or trying to make one model to rule them all. That said thoough, the capabilities of Chinese models in the same domains where American ones shine are very close as well. So, I do expect that Chinese models will catch up and start surpassing American ones on their own turf before long. I'm also expecting that the trend will shift towards running smaller and local models for most things because you just don't need a giant model to do most tasks.

[-] sudoer777@lemmy.ml 5 points 23 hours ago

I'm looking forward to when hardware gets cheap enough to try Qwen 3.8

The money ran out and they need an excuse.

[-] TrollAccount69@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 day ago

It’s because they’re hitting model size constraints. There’s only so much memory bandwidth you can get between racks or even rack spaces and memory bandwidth is the constraint for nearly every ml thing.

Expect a reversal once a more memory dense component hits.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 day ago

There's no reason to think that the architecture itself can scale indefinitely. It might very well be that LLMs have some hard constraints on the scope of the problems they're capable of solving.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] 4grams@awful.systems 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They all must have figured out by now that they are hitting a limit. I honestly don’t think LLMs will lead us to AGI. I’m sure it’s a step on the path to it, but I’m think it’s a lot further than most think.

So, they make this “agreement”, then the slowdown is just being “responsible” so that the investors don’t panic. Meanwhile they all go full tilt behind the scenes to try to find the next breakthrough.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago

That's my view as well, LLMs are likely just one piece of a much bigger puzzle and we're now hitting the limit of what you can do with them in practical terms.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

They hit a wall and want to prepare everyone for the fact that they won't be able to meet the expectations that they themselves created.

[-] Hexorg@beehaw.org 11 points 1 day ago

They lied their asses off about capabilities and are using “safety concerns” as means to get investors off their asses. Google didn’t get new billions of investments and oh look their model didn’t “escape”.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2026
182 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

43262 readers
250 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS