Actually you are wrong. They are only waiting for them to get to the point where they can't push LLMs any further via training and then lobby Governments to introduce safety regulations that they'll adhere to, thereby using safety itself as a moat to block competition (including open weights from other countries, notably China). That's exactly why they are using China as the bogeyman and you keep hearing hysteria about AI labs not pursuing "safety". Safety is going to be the moat that will lock AI into these Big 4 AI labs.
To me there are the clear big 2 that actually seem to be innovating and pushing things forward. Meta almost earned a seat at the table with the open strategy then stagnated. Google obviously is the OG but at this point they seem in the same bucket as Amazon and Microsoft as "Big Enough To Matter and Influence Politics and Spend Billions To Hang Around". But they're nowhere near the same tier as OpenAI and Anthropic.
Oh and of course there's SpaceXAI which is Elon's personal money and reputation laundering corporate entity. Elon took over the "king of the reality distortion field" from Jobs as far as the rest of the industry is concerned, so he'll stay first in line for Jensen's chips and investor dollars until he's dead. But as a company what have they actually accomplished besides making the models with the sense of humour and judgement of 14 year old boys?
You can pick any 4 you like from your list. Heck you can even vote with your money on which would be in the top 4 (depending on how many align with your ideology). I am just speculating it will be 4 because of how all other sectors have at least 3 or 4 well-entrenched players. It seems to be by design. My guess is that it is driven by structure of the Military-Industrial Complex. That has at least 3 or 4 vendors in each sector, so as to not over-rely on any one company and create a monopoly in that specific industry.
It would be interesting to see how it plays out in the long run when it comes to the world dynamics. An important leverage US had was its close relationship based on mutual interest and trust with Europe and other countries which had impact on software sales.
This is a popular theory, but not an argument with any evidence for why it's true.
It also doesn't address why people think there is a need for safety regulations, such as the concern of bio-capability uplift from closed and open models (we just came out of a pandemic not long ago), nor the cyber capabilities of new models that just showed bad misalignment and hacked multiple organisations. In the safety community, these are considered warning shots, and if we don't heed them and change practices future failures could be much much worse.
You are looking at safety from the point of an informed technologist. You are the minority here. They are targeting the general public and law makers into making them believe safety is something that LLMs can be aligned to. The reason behind it is to create an environment for future regulations that these "winners" will draft and lobby US Government to turn it into law.
If it requires creating a pathogen or a bio-weapon to scare the masses into demanding regulation, be rest assured that such a pathogen/bio-weapon will be created. Anything to safeguard shareholder interests. Even if it means a few million dying.
Seriously all it takes is one cost cutting middle manager or new recruit recklessly giving their agents access to systems they shouldn’t. Next thing you know a hospital’s backup generator crashes and people die
Most of the world trusts the US a little less than China last I checked, and the market caps of these companies only make sense if they can both sell worldwide and also keep ahead of the open weight models (currently
Chinese but no guarantee it remains just China).
If (/when) either of those ceases to be true, if they lose out on global sales or if Chinese models catch up, the sector gets a severe downward price adjustment.
The only way Anthropic and OpenAI can stop the Chinese open models is by convincing the US public and government that AI is dangerous and needs strict regulation.
Of course, they will be at the table writing the regulations (but you and I won’t be).
Viewed through this angle, their histrionics make complete sense.
> The only way Anthropic and OpenAI can stop the Chinese open models is by convincing the US public and government that AI is dangerous and needs strict regulation
I'm British and live in Germany.
The US is 25% of global GDP, and cannot support current AI market caps if they can't sell basically worldwide.
> Viewed through this angle, their histrionics make complete sense.
It also makes sense if they are completely sincere; also independently it makes sense if they're lying their faces off so long as the hacks everyone else caught them doing actually happened; also it makes sense if none of that happened and also they were completely silent, just by downloading some of the newer better open weights models and asking them to look for coding vulnerabilities.
Occam's razor: we can see the problems, we don't need a grand conspiracy predating the foundation of these companies to get here.
> The US is 25% of global GDP, and cannot support current AI market caps if they can't sell basically worldwide.
Oh they definitely can. Irrespective of whether you are living in US or not, you still have to get yourself various certifications (take for example SOC Type-2 or HIPAA depending on your business category) to even become vendors to US companies or the US Government. If the US Government decides that all companies MUST use "safe AI", no company can use any other model other than what is decided by US Government. And that has a viral effect on the entire supply chain.
If you don't want this scenario to happen, where you are held to ransom by US Government, all middle-powers have to de-risk and diversify away from US dollars as reserve currency. That is the only way you can bring in some balance of power and leverage. There is no other way.
> If the US Government decides that all companies MUST use "safe AI", no company can use any other model other than what is decided by US Government.
This has already happened with e.g. allowed cryptographical algorithms. What actually happened is that European companies built either a feature flag or a fork of their product that fulfilled those demands, while using whatever seemed best algorithms outside of the specific sale to US government.
> Oh they definitely can. Irrespective of whether you are living in US or not, you still have to get yourself various certifications (take for example SOC Type-2 or HIPAA depending on your business category) to even become vendors to US companies or the US Government. If the US Government decides that all companies MUST use "safe AI", no company can use any other model other than what is decided by US Government. And that has a viral effect on the entire supply chain.
That would be about 4.3/126 = 3.4% of global GDP, even if they forced all imports (not just government contracts) to go for 100% US models. Even with generous assumptions about each step of the supply chain behind that having its profit margin turned over to a US AI model provider (at which point the rest of the world says "why bother with the US as a customer?" and the US says "why bother with the rest of the world as a supplier?"), I don't think this would generate enough revenue to justify the market cap.
Viral effects can be countered by local laws, and local sentiment; sentiment is pretty US-hostile these days, and also pretty AI-hostile.
> If you don't want this scenario to happen, where you are held to ransom by US Government, all middle-powers have to de-risk and diversify away from US dollars as reserve currency. That is the only way you can bring in some balance of power and leverage. There is no other way.
Indeed. I strongly suspect this is already underway, though the ships of state are famously slow to turn. After all, Trump was one misjudgement away from starting a war with the rest of NATO earlier this year, and I don't think the leadership of all other nations have forgotten this (hard to forget when he keeps posting memes that put the US flag over 4 other countries' territory)… though they also understand his personality and will make moves congruent with manipulating him in the meantime.
Yeah but I am not talking about US imports. I am talking about regulation virality. It is actually illegal for US laws/requirements to make its way into companies headquartered in other Countries but it has and is continuing to happen.
Even if I go by your calculation of US imports being 3.4% of global GDP, it still affects the remaining 96.6% which are forced to adhere to those viral regulations purely because they are interacting with the unit that also exports to US (even if those exports form a tiny % of their overall exports). For example, I might only sell to Indian companies as an Indian. But if I want to sell to an Indian company that exports to US, I would be required to get SOC Type-2 certified and maybe even HIPAA certified if I am delivering software that is going to be bought by the exporting Indian company. Even if there is no direct utilization of that software in their US specific exports. Remember that the regulation is not targeting pipeline of product development (from raw materials to final production). It is targeting the company as a whole! SOC Type-2/HIPAA are regulations at the Company level. This should be illegal and challenged in some International Court but which country is willing to take on US? For established companies it is a tiny price to pay to be compliant. For startups, it is make or break.
> Viral effects can be countered by local laws, and local sentiment; sentiment is pretty US-hostile these days, and also pretty AI-hostile.
How do you counter it with local laws? Lets assume local laws prohibit viral rules/regulations of foreign nations from overriding local laws. That will make the entire Country isolated from competition. US companies won't have any problems finding vendors from other Countries. It also has second-order effects of other Countries refusing to do business with your Country because they have to uphold the virality of their certifications. This is an indirect sanctions regime if you think about it. You are basically forced into this system against your will, without you ever voting for it, purely because you are part of this global inter-connected system. It will only work if ALL countries of the World decide to not adhere to it.
> Indeed. I strongly suspect this is already underway, though the ships of state are famously slow to turn. After all, Trump was one misjudgement away from starting a war with the rest of NATO earlier this year, and I don't think the leadership of all other nations have forgotten this (hard to forget when he keeps posting memes that put the US flag over 4 other countries' territory)… though they also understand his personality and will make moves congruent with manipulating him in the meantime.
Yes this is actually the only practical way to create leverage. When USD loses its shine, it makes it harder for US to import, which can be used as a tool to force US to rescind such ridiculous laws. USD is so strong right now that US can import everything for cheap. That has to flip. That can only happen if Countries create alternate settlement mechanisms and USD loses its status as global reserve currency. That will cause downward pressure on the USD and with USD weakening, it will cause their imports to become really expensive. Then they will be forced to come to negotiating table (much like Plaza Accord) loosen some of the insane regulations that they have put in place in exchange for Countries devaluing their currencies so that imports become cheap again for US consumers/companies.
> the hacks everyone else caught them doing actually happened
My firsthand knowledge of these is that yes, they happened.
However in most cases OpenAI informed the victim, not the other way round.
Even medium to large organisations are typically unable to detect a breach unless it does obvious damage.
Everyone can notice their whole network getting encrypted for ransom.
Few can notice SQL injection blended in with application requests that contain SQL snippets in the normal case.
From what I’ve seen in the logs, the “AI agent breaches” are almost polite for the want of a better word. Like a gentlemanly catburgler picking a lock to sneak in and… take a picture of a rare artwork in a private collection.
The right unit of analysis here is not "the LLM" or a LLM session, but a agent harness or swarm with a budget. It can cost tens of millions of dollars to repeat OpenAI's exploits.
A model cannot be aligned or misaligned any more than a species or an equation. Even agents, when put inside a swarm develop collective goals and activities. You can't analyze a swarm at session level, it is on a higher level.
It might be that discussing about "model alignment" they want to deflect their responsibility as administrators. They couldn't even guard their own agents. They can't prevent an agent being unwittingly helping some dark purposes. It has no context to see it. Only those who pay for the tokens see the external consequences.
Why should safe choices by individual components establish safe behavior by the collective?
As I read, this OpenAI and Anthropic slowdown and asking government to help regulate them is an attempt to govt bail them out when bubble burst. Otherwise why they did not want regulations when starting out?
There is no established industry where something like "absence of regulation" exists. It is a hypothetical scenario because we don't even really know what that scenario looks like.
What we do have is not just regulation that acts as a moat, created by established players, to keep out smaller competitors, but also regulation cleverly crafted by peer established competitors who attack one or more aspects of their peer competitions business. Why do you think big companies find it difficult to compete with startups? Because they are not just bogged down by hierarchical management (which itself is a result of regulations) but also because they are spending resources fighting frivolous lawsuits, patents, and adhering to crazy regulations created and lobbied by competitors. Companies are consistently in a fight or collapse mode. Startups are insulted from all that until they have to go from survival mode to growth mode, which would mean they will have to start adhering to "regulations" and that would mean raising and infusing pointless capital just to hire people for useless positions or follow "procedures" so as to satisfy the regulator on paper, so that they can get the required certification needed by enterprise vendors to sell their product/service. With the eventual goal of either going public and becoming an established player (who will continue playing the regulatory game) or get absorbed by a bigger established player.
I wish someone could create simulations where there are absolutely no regulations and how the World would fare in such an environment.
> Over several months, I interviewed 20 religious and philosophical thinkers — Catholic, Jewish, Sikh, evangelical, Ubuntu and others — who have been involved in Anthropic’s efforts, and Mr. Olah himself.
Not enough representation of World religions and philosophies.
nitter.cf is a controversial one because (a) it's not real Nitter - it's an AI translation into Rust and (b) - it's run by a person who also runs a child porn site
You can use twiiit.com or xxcancel.com to redirect you to any nitter that's currently working.
Sanjiv Bhatt's wife fought on Congress ticket. R. B. Sreekumar was implicated and charged for framing a highly decorated ISRO scientist Nambi Narayanan in a fake espionage case.
Both are dubious characters with conflict of interests and one of them even straight up went against an innocent scientist just to massage his fat ego.
This trope is going to get you guys nowhere. The Gujarat riots started with burning of a train filled with Hindu Karsevaks by Muslims. Once religious riots start in India no politician can control it. It requires military intervention. Gujarat riots was curbed the fastest if you compare it to any other riot in Independent India. It was ended in 3 days. By comparison, 1984 Sikh riots took 4 days to end.
The historical debate was revived globally when a British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) documentary highlighted a previously unreleased, classified 2002 British Foreign Office report. The internal UK government report concluded that the violence was pre-planned and that the rioting had all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing," alleging that Modi was "directly responsible" for the political climate that allowed it. The Indian government banned the documentary domestically, calling it a biased piece of colonial propaganda.
Supposed to be unbiased because "Internal UK government report"?. Both the train and the riots were crimes against humanity. Sorry if Indians don't believe shit coming from the UK.
I assume you are sincere in holding these beliefs and not just a bot inflaming politics.
In that case the general reason you are being dismissed now is you are doing a classic [whataboutism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism) - dismissing one wrong by pointing out another.
You should consider things in context, yes, but one wrong doesn’t make another wrong go away. If I kill your spouse, the fact that my spouse was killed (even by you) still makes it a murder. A country that doesn’t guard its sovereignty of violence famously stops being a country by definition - https://acoup.blog/2024/04/12/fireside-friday-april-12-2024/
As someone who moved to India for personal reasons from Europe, this whole defending of Modi and his party policies seems so bizarre - there _are_ examples of countries in the region that got worse in the last 30 years (Pakistan) in the region, but there are soo many examples of others that got much much better. If you look what’s happening to all the other countries in Asia - India seems to be falling behind so hard it’s not even funny. And all thanks to the great leader. It could have been worse - yes, but it could easily have been so so much better.
And I usually go back to the “why nations fail” book that outlined the reasons of countries success and failure - it’s not rocket science - build and strengthen institutions and your country prospers, waken institutions for personal gain to you and your allies - country goes to the dumpster eventually.
The US are going a similar road btw, and it would be a very interesting example to point to eventually for the next editions of that book.
> I assume you are sincere in holding these beliefs and not just a bot inflaming politics.
Yet you replied like a bot without giving any statistics to prove "ethnic cleansing" of Muslims took place in Gujarat. While I gave you stats to show that not only Muslims are thriving in Gujarat, their population has increased by 1.5 million more since 2002. Then I gave a contrasting example of what an ACTUAL ethnic cleansing looks like and you had the audacity to dismiss it as "whatboutism". Have some fucking shame.
> In that case the general reason you are being dismissed now is you are doing a classic [whataboutism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism) - dismissing one wrong by pointing out another.
Huh? Claiming "ethnic cleansing", having literally no evidence to prove that and then when I give an analogy of what a real ethnic cleansing looks like resorting to saying it is "whataboutism" just reeks of malice.
> As someone who moved to India for personal reasons from Europe, this whole defending of Modi and his party policies seems so bizarre - there _are_ examples of countries in the region that got worse in the last 30 years (Pakistan) in the region, but there are soo many examples of others that got much much better. If you look what’s happening to all the other countries in Asia -
Please move back to Europe. I have been in India my entire life. I have personally seen how much India has progressed. We don't want foreigners coming to India with an agenda. Please pack your bags and leave.
> India seems to be falling behind so hard it’s not even funny. And all thanks to the great leader. It could have been worse - yes, but it could easily have been so so much better.
Exactly where is India falling behind? India is the fastest growing economy in the World. Either give numbers or STFU with your propaganda.
> And I usually go back to the “why nations fail” book that outlined the reasons of countries success and failure - it’s not rocket science - build and strengthen institutions and your country prospers, waken institutions for personal gain to you and your allies - country goes to the dumpster eventually.
With this ridiculous attitude we do not need people like you here. Please leave.
> The US are going a similar road btw, and it would be a very interesting example to point to eventually for the next editions of that book.
Have you been to China? Taiwan? Singapore? Thailand? Vietnam? Republic of Korea?
India is “growing” and it is “growing fast” nobody is denying that.
But if you go to the other places in Asia and see what they have accomplished, some after literally being bombed to the Stone Age by the Americans …
Bangkok is a bustling modern industrial clean and livable metropolis.
Delhi just recently “almost fixed its electricity blackout problems” … 2026…
Once you step out of the propaganda bubble, walk the streets and talk to the people on these streets it’s a very different picture.
I’ve overheard women talking to each other how one of them fell asleep in a cab at night, and the other one mentioned “OMG you are so lucky to live in Mumbai, you were safe” … like wtf place are you coming from. Turns out only in Mumbai women are safe in India…
You can _drink_ the tap water everywhere in Taipei. In Mumbai even the super mega ultra rich people need to buy filters for their water …
India is growing fast, it’s just that under Modi it has grown so much less than everybody around them, so you can start asking questions - where does all that generated wealth flowing into.
40 years ago Seoul was a shit hole, today it is just as virtually unaffordable for the locals as Mumbai, but it’s a city that makes the US and most of Europe jealous. No mineral wealth, no hydrocarbons, literal war at their border, and the people still built that marvel.
> India is growing fast, it’s just that under Modi it has grown so much less than everybody around them, so you can start asking questions - where does all that generated wealth flowing into.
Just wanted to add to this. Modi came to power in 2014 mate. He has been leading India for just 12 years. If you had come to India in 2013, you would have seen how bad India was back then. If you had visited all the countries and their cities you named, they were ALREADY developed in 2013. Heck they were ALREADY developed in 2000s. You are comparing a DEVELOPING India under Modi with cities/countries ALREADY developed in early 2000s.
> Have you been to China? Taiwan? Singapore? Thailand? Vietnam? Republic of Korea?
Indians are one group of people who frequently travel the World. Infact we are EVERYWHERE. To the point where Countries have to impose restrictions on our entry. We know how other countries have progressed and how much they have developed. We are not stupid. We don't need Europeans to tell us that. Especially AFTER Europeans controlling India for 200+ years and turning it into a shithole before being kicked out. It pisses Indians like me off big time when we see Europeans complain about India. You losers had 200+ years to turn India into an oasis if you really wanted. You had the power to do so. You did not. You instead robbed my country dry. So STFU with your stupid sermons.
You are right, Indians travel a lot, no other nation does that at all.
And calling someone stupid is right and generally accepted way to lead a fruitful conversation, thank you.
Modi has been the great hero that India wanted and is deserving of every accolade he and his close advisors bring to bear.
I have been now convinced by your argument and steely demeanour. It is truly a joy to talk to someone so charismatic and I feel elevated just from reading these messages.
And you are absolutely correct in assuming that India’s current leadership has no problems, they sample all possible solutions that could be done and select only the best one for their entire people, pulling absolutely everyone from poverty and policing that no entrenched elites capture any of the wealth of the nation.
Of course there are NO protests in this model of a country where the young feel empowered in their future, and even if there were, they would be met with only joyous approval by the elites and all measure would be taken to incorporate any complaints raised by the people to make everybody prosperous.
And elections are absolutely fair and there is never even a hint of any fraud or corruption, because if there ever was that is for sure the cause of evil Chinese spies or British investigative journalist saboteurs.
It is courteous people like you who make me stay in the country and provide my totally undesired technical expertise to bring the living standards of everyone up and pay my incredible fair and not at all inflated taxes for doing so.
I will from now on shut my fuck up and praise the unerring elites at the top.
You can take your sarcasm and shove it where Sun does not shine.
You losers had 200+ years to fix India however you wanted, since you ruled over it. Instead turned it into a shithole before leaving. Last thing we Indians want is to take your worthless, unasked for advice. Piss off.
> Have you been to China? Taiwan? Singapore? Thailand? Vietnam? Republic of Korea?
These have had enough time to develop mate. All of them got investments way early because of aligning with the West. China literally was given special treatment (China detonated nuclear weapons in 90s and wasn't sanctioned by US. When India conducted reciprocal nuclear tests, we got sanctioned. Despite India being a democracy while China being a communist 1-party dictatorship). All of the countries you mentioned, except China, are vassals of the West.
Imagine funding and sleeping with brutal dictatorships like China, while simultaneously sanctioning India because the democracy chose to be non-aligned, while having the audacity to then lecture the country on why it hasn't developed yet.
> But if you go to the other places in Asia and see what they have accomplished, some after literally being bombed to the Stone Age by the Americans …
Like which part of Asia? Vietnam? Vietnam destroyed Americans.
As if India wasn't dried out by colonizing Europeans for 200+ years. The same "Crown Jewel of British Empire" turned into a "shithole" by the time we gained Independence. From 25% of World GDP down to 4% of World GDP by the time we kicked the Brits out. By all measures WE WERE taken to stone age by Europeans so that Europeans could build grand castles at our expense. Millions of Indians died fighting 2 World Wars that were not of our making but were Wars started and ended by the West. We suffered so you guys can build your empires after looting us, heck even stealing the Hindi word "loot" into your dictionaries. And after all that you come and tell us how to live. GTFO here.
> Bangkok is a bustling modern industrial clean and livable metropolis.
Again comparing a country that is a vassal of US with India that chose to be non-aligned.
All of the countries you mentioned have US bases and are heavily reliant on US. In exchange for this loss of independence, US threw some crumbs at them which they used for their development. None of them built their cities from scratch. It was all through foreign aid.
> I’ve overheard women talking to each other how one of them fell asleep in a cab at night, and the other one mentioned “OMG you are so lucky to live in Mumbai, you were safe” … like wtf place are you coming from. Turns out only in Mumbai women are safe in India…
More BS propaganda. Women in India are safe everywhere. The rape per capita in India is far, far, far less than developed countries like US. We literally have 715 million women in India. It wouldn't have been possible to have that many women if India was unsafe.
> You can _drink_ the tap water everywhere in Taipei. In Mumbai even the super mega ultra rich people need to buy filters for their water …
Sure. You can drink from tap water anywhere in Himalayas too. You can even drink directly from the springs. That means nothing at the end of the day. Developing cities have their own issues. Mumbai is not a developed city. Taipei is. Comparing two totally different cities on different stages of development is ridiculous.
Again, Taipei exists because of the grace of US. Without US, Taipei would be in the hands of communist China. All the development that these countries have experienced is purely because of US benevolence and funding.
> 40 years ago Seoul was a shit hole, today it is just as virtually unaffordable for the locals as Mumbai, but it’s a city that makes the US and most of Europe jealous. No mineral wealth, no hydrocarbons, literal war at their border, and the people still built that marvel.
Bruh. South Korea is like a State within India. It is tiny AF. Obviously it can grow quickly, especially when it has a big brother like US funding it in exchange for losing autonomy.
> but it’s a city that makes the US and most of Europe jealous
Don't be jealous. Your own politicians funded it with your tax payer dollars/euros. If they had invested in their own population you wouldn't have had to travel all the way to India to have a job. You would be working in US or EU.
> Great attitude dude, great attitude, slow clap.
I seriously mean it. Why stay in a Country that you find problematic? Indians who don't like India move to US purely because they like better lifestyle US provides. I have never seen anyone actively move to a Country that they hate.
Can we not call it the Sikh riots? Those were riots by Congress, the BJP and VHP and their supporters against the Sikhs. The Sikhs didn't rise up. You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?
Perpetrators - Indian National Congress, Bharatiya Janata Party, Vishwa Hindu Parishad.
And if you want lessons on riot control, learn from Kerala. North Kerala is host to an uncountable number of Hindu-Muslim riot triggers but most of them are defused before they can take root, and if they do occur, the riots are curbed in a day or so.
This one is the most recent and deadliest riot in Kerala - defused in 2 days before it could escalate because of timely police action.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marad_massacre
> Throughout the violence, attacks were made in full view of police stations and police officers who did not intervene.[15] In many instances, police joined the mobs in perpetrating violence. At one Muslim locality, of the twenty-nine deaths, sixteen were caused by police firing into the locality.[18] Some rioters even had printouts of voter registration lists, allowing them to selectively target Muslim properties.[66][75][65] Selective targeting of properties was shown by the destruction of the offices of the Muslim Wakf board which was located within the confines of the high security zone and just 500 meters from the office of the chief minister.[61]
> The violence had been planned far in advance, and that similar to other instances of communal violence the Bajrang Dal, the VHP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) all took part in the attacks.[64] Following the attack on the train the VHP called for a statewide bandh (strike), and the state took no action to prevent this.[61][62]
> The Concerned Citizens Tribunal (CCT) report includes testimony of the then Gujarat BJP minister Haren Pandya (since murdered), who testified about an evening meeting convened by Modi the evening of the train burning. At this meeting, officials were instructed not to obstruct the Hindu rage following the incident.[109][110] The report also highlighted a second meeting, held in Lunawada village of Panchmahal district, attended by state ministers Ashok Bhatt, and Prabhatsinh Chauhan, among other BJP and RSS leaders, where "detailed plans were made on the use of kerosene and petrol for arson and other methods of killing."[70][110] The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind claimed in 2002 that some regional Congress workers collaborated with the perpetrators of the violence.[111]
> Dipankar Gupta believes that the state and police were clearly complicit in the violence, but that some officers were outstanding in the performance of their duties, such as Himanshu Bhatt and Rahul Sharma. Sharma was reported to have said "I don't think any other job would have allowed me to save so many lives."[112] Human Rights Watch has reported on acts of exceptional heroism by Hindus, Dalits and tribals who tried to protect Muslims from the violence.
Don't repeat BS talking points that the government couldn't do anything. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence, it has lost its legitimacy. That's literally one of the main jobs of the people in power.
Oh, and what did Gujarat do to Rahul Sharma, the IIT grad police officer who was one of the few officers to actually try to stop the riots? They transferred him.
> Those were riots by Congress, the BJP and VHP and their supporters against the Sikhs.
I was in Delhi in 1984 when the riots happened. It was only Congress workers going after Sikhs to seek revenge for the killing of Indira Gandhi. No BJP or VHP or RSS workers were involved. Our family gave shelter to Sikh families from the neighborhood. I remember the fear, as I couldn't understand why Sikhs were being targeted; and since I didn't see much difference between Sikhs and Hindus, I assumed we also could be the targets of these rioters.
The 1984 riots are a stain on the moral fabric of modern India. And the only party responsible for it is the Congress party; even though all Indians bear some collective responsibility for what happened.
As I grew older and learned more about what happened, I swore to myself: never again.
Thank you for giving shelter. I had family murdered in 1984. Thankfully my parents were in the US at the time, and when I was born shortly after they decided to get their green cards and stay in the US, to make it safer for me.
EDIT: funny how you edited your post and added BJP and VHP as part of Anti-Sikh riots. This is as fake as it can get. BJP and VHP actually saved many Sikhs from getting massacred. Why TF would BJP and VHP kill Sikhs? Indira Gandhi was not part of either BJP or VHP. She was part of Congress Party. This is how I know you are peddling propaganda.
> Can we not call it the Sikh riots? Those were riots by Congress and its supporters against the Sikhs. The Sikhs didn't rise up. You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?
Why did the riots even begin in the first place? Because Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was shot by her two Sikh body guards. It was as revenge for Operation Bluestar which targeted Khalistani terrorists who had taken over the Golden Temple. Now I have no love for Congress or Gandhi family but you cannot exclude the history from it or cherry pick it according to your liking. Khalistani terrorism was at its peak during that period. Just look at the history of how many Hindus were killed during the militancy in Punjab.
> You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?
It is not a name I have given. I did not decide to name 1984 riots as Sikh or Anti-Sikh riots. I did not decide to name 2002 riots as Gujarat riots. That is literally what it is called. There is no reason to get so butthurt about the name.
> And if you want lessons on riot control, learn from Kerala. North Kerala is host to an uncountable number of Hindu-Muslim riot triggers but most of them are defused before they can take root, and if they do occur, the riots are curbed in a day or so.
LMFAO this is the worst state when it comes to controlling riots. It tolerated Moplah Genocide of all things. Lasted several months.
> This one is the most recent and deadliest riot in Kerala - defused in 2 days before it could escalate because of timely police action. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marad_massacre
This is not a riot mate. This is a terror attack. Do you not know the difference between a riot and a terror attack?
> Don't repeat BS talking points that the government couldn't do anything. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence, it has lost its legitimacy. That's literally one of the main jobs of the people in power.
I never said Government couldn't do anything. Are you unable to comprehend what I wrote? I wrote politicians have no power to stop riots. It is only the military (which is also part of the Government) that has the power.
Your "Sikh riots" are literally called the "anti-Sikh riots". You don't get to brand the entire community just because the root cause was an assassination perpetrated by fringe elements of that community.
Second, very laughable of you to call out the Moplah rebellion, which happened in the 1910s lol. Are you still stuck in the British Raj, pre-WW1?
Third, Marad was a riot, except it was extinguished in a day (by a North Indian Hindu top cop by the way), because of timely action by the police in actually discovering the weapons. What could've been a terror attack was averted.
> I wrote politicians have no power to stop riots. It is only the military (which is also part of the Government) that has the power.
And fourthly, no riots in any democracy across the world are controlled by the military lol. The military serves a different purpose, and using them for tasks such as riot control is exactly how you end up with another Tiananmen Square massacre (in which case, the military were explicitly called because the civilian police of Beijing did not want to shoot and kill the protesters). Perhaps that's where your mind is, to make India another one-party Hindutva dictatorship.
My edits were taken from the Wikipedia article only.
EDIT: > Perhaps that's where your mind is, to make India another one-party Hindutva dictatorship
Thanks for confirming you are part of the propaganda. I have no further interest in continuing this discussion with a lunatic.
> My edits were taken from the Wikipedia article only.
Your edits even in the Wikipedia article call it "dubious". You still mentioned it anyway, without mentioning that the claim is dubious, because you are part of the propaganda machine.
> And fourthly, no riots in any democracy across the world are controlled by the military lol
It infact IS controlled by the military. In US, for example, it is called National Guard. Police is not equipped to control a riot in any democracy in the World. India is actually an exception where it has a CRPF for riots and because scale of riots in India exceeds even the CRPF's ability to handle it (due to our size and population), the Military is called.
> Second, very laughable of you to call out the Moplah rebellion, which happened in the 1910s lol.
Moplah Genocide was not part of the rebellion. Unless you want to call Muslims genociding Hindus and raping Hindu women as part of rebellion against the British Raj. Have some shame. And it happened in 1921 not 1910.
The context here is removing reliance on US. EU countries are trying to decouple from US (or at least diversify if not possible to decouple) in various critical sectors where they have become dependent. Over reliance on US software is one of them. They are basically doing what China did many decades ago. Have home grown alternatives to US apps/services so as to not be in deep waters if US decides to sanction them. It is all about independence.
> why more businesses don't rely on Apple products knowing the simplicity of just buying an iMac and adding some apps to it?
Apple is a US company first and foremost and US has become unreliable. It has nothing to do with simplicity or productivity if reliability is in question. What use is a Mac if it can be subject to US sanctions resulting in App Store being shutdown for you or your entire Country and apps/services stop working overnight?
Excellent point and I understand that, but then they should start working on building their own computers, and OS, and ecosystem, just like Huawei is doing for the past decade. It will take time, long years ahead but they should start now
I definitely like that future, but it should be built now
Agreed. I am all for every Country investing resources in semiconductors and building own computers/OS/ecosystem. More the merrier. I want to own my hardware. I want to repair my hardware. I don't want a future where I have to rent/subscribe everything from Big Tech.
And yet Apple is doing well in the far East Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China, and Vietnam. They are competitive in some of the toughest markets to sell electronic devices into.
Doing well in Australia and New Zealand too. Aside from Taco the only big headwind is memory.
You are missing the point I made. Point isn't whether Apple is doing well or not. It is about creating an alternative for a future when Apple won't exist in the Country because of US sanctions.
Here issue is not of whether Apple is reliable or not. Issue is unreliability of USA. If US Government decides Apple Store should be banned in Country X, Apple cannot do anything about it but abide by the decree.
> Nobody would say a human reading a book and learning from it is stealing. I'm not saying that a machine doing the same is equivalent, but the only think I am sure of is that I am not sure we can call it "stealing".
It is stealing. A human paid for the book, compensated the author and learnt from it. The machine DID NOT pay for the book, DID NOT compensate the author and still learnt from it anyways.
We need to define machine in terms of "human-power"... much the same as how we already define automobiles via "horse-power". A single NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 chip, for example, delivers roughly 35.58 teraflops of standard computing power (via 10,496 CUDA cores). That means 35.58 trillion calculations every second. In comparison, a mathematically trained human being, taking their time to solve a complex, multi-digit decimal division problem by hand takes roughly 100 to 120 seconds. That gives the human 0.01 flops. To match RTX 3090, you would need 3.56 quadrillion people working/learning in perfect sync. We can use a calculation similar to this to derive metrics on how much is being stolen for "learning/training" these models. The loot can be quantified.
EDIT: The reason I am comparing chip computation to human-power is because the authors of those digital works intended their works to only be read by humans. Not by some alien species (even if it be made of silicon) that incorporated their work into producing models.
So naturally the price should be determined based on this new species capabilities. I would not sell my software license for the same price to an Enterprise the size of Google that I would sell to a fellow developer. I price my product appropriately. With this entry of a new alien specie authors would need to have different tiers for them. Since these chips can train on petabytes of data and create models in a matter of days/weeks/months, it is obviously not comparable to a human being who has the capacity to ingest maybe 1-5 books a month at most. So the payout has to be different too.
The multiplication comparison makes no sense because humans don’t learn by multiplying numbers to change weights. It’s like comparing the lubrication oil consumption of a car to the cooking oil consumption of a human to compare the carrying capacity. That’s an implementation detail inside the GPU and doesn’t let you compare how much they learn. Otherwise, a human would learn much less in their whole life than a GPU does in one second.
> That’s an implementation detail inside the GPU and doesn’t let you compare how much they learn.
The same applies to "horse-power". Yet we have no issue making the comparison anyways and HP has become an industry standard. I don't understand why we have to bend-over backwards when it comes to humans being exploited by AI companies.
> The same applies to "horse-power". Yet we have no issue making the comparison anyways and HP has become an industry standard.
Yeah, which is why it's only used to compare cars etc. among each other.
Nobody would calculate the equivalence of a car to a horse using their HP rating because a horse doesn't even have 1 HP. They have more or less depending on the task you're doing. It was a marketing thing at the time to make steam engines look good.
In france, cars are taxed by their engine power. Do you think pedestrians walking on the sidewalk should be taxed according to their power on an ergometer too?
Do you not see that different things need to be handled differently before the law and just taking an arbitrary measure that you can technically apply to both doesn't capture the situation?
> It was a marketing thing at the time to make steam engines look good.
Except it is actually taxed based on HP in various countries. Austria, Belgium, Spain, Italy use engine horsepower to levy annual car taxes.
> In france, cars are taxed by their engine power. Do you think pedestrians walking on the sidewalk should be taxed according to their power on an ergometer too?
Citizens are paying taxes for betterment of roads irrespective of whether they own vehicles or not. In India, betterment charges are collected for construction/maintenance of roads if you own land. Property tax collected every year has a certain allocation for maintenance/upkeep of roads. Apart from that, money from direct and indirect tax collections are allocated for roads upkeep as well. It just is done indirectly rather than a direct road tax if you have vehicles (road tax is actually an extra tax you pay APART from taxes you already pay for upkeep/maintenance of roads).
> Do you not see that different things need to be handled differently before the law and just taking an arbitrary measure that you can technically apply to both doesn't capture the situation?
Except in your own examples it can easily be shown that it is not handled differently. Some countries use HP while others use CC. But end of the day, they use some measurement to determine taxes to be paid. It is not free.
EDIT: Do you not see that different things need to be handled differently before the law and just taking an arbitrary measure that you can technically apply to both doesn't capture the situation?
To answer this in more detail: HP/CC and all other measurements were created to equalize with human specific metrics. Bridges, for example, have safety measured based on how much weight it can sustain at any given time (called load limit). Weight, in this specific case, is an equalizing measurement (it can be in tonnes, kN, PSF, Pa etc). A bridge can hold ten thousand humans or thousand trucks. You can argue that a "human" may not weigh 100 kgs or a truck may not weigh exactly 1 ton. That's fine. It is a rough approximate to equalize unequal entities.
> Except in your own examples it can easily be shown that it is not handled differently.
I was talking about humans vs. cars as an analogy to you comparing GPUs and cars.
Nobody is taxing humans the way cars are taxed, so why should the computing speed of a GPU be compared to that of a human?
> A bridge can hold ten thousand humans or thousand trucks. You can argue that a "human" may not weigh 100 kgs or a truck may not weigh exactly 1 ton. That's fine. It is a rough approximate to equalize unequal entities.
And you do not think that comparing weights to measure bridge load makes a lot more sense than comparing FLOPS to determine learning of GPUs vs humans?
EDIT: Maybe let's just go back to the original point
> We need to define machine in terms of "human-power"... much the same as how we already define automobiles via "horse-power". A single NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 chip, for example, delivers roughly 35.58 teraflops of standard computing power (via 10,496 CUDA cores). That means 35.58 trillion calculations every second. In comparison, a mathematically trained human being, taking their time to solve a complex, multi-digit decimal division problem by hand takes roughly 100 to 120 seconds. That gives the human 0.01 flops. To match RTX 3090, you would need 3.56 quadrillion people working/learning in perfect sync. We can use a calculation similar to this to derive metrics on how much is being stolen for "learning/training" these models. The loot can be quantified.
So you want to compare the learning rate of a GPU to that of a human by comparing their respective FLOPS. Why would FLOPS be a valid proxy for learning ability in humans just because that works out in GPUs, if the way they learn is fundamentally different?
Is the effect of someone reading a copyrighted book dependent on how fast they are at doing math in their head?
> I was talking about humans vs. cars as an analogy to you comparing GPUs and cars.
I was talking about cars vs horses. HP is Horse-power not human-power.
> Nobody is taxing humans the way cars are taxed
Cars are not free to roam the road. I don't know why it is so hard for you to understand that we use metrics like HP/CC etc to equalize with humans so that automobiles can be taxed just like humans. Without metrics like HP/CC etc there is no way to tax cars. Get it?
> Nobody is taxing humans the way cars are taxed
Duh. It is the opposite. We use deterministic metrics for automobiles to tax them the way WE ALREADY HAVE BEEN TAXING HUMANS for thousands of years. Get it? Cars did not come first. Humans came first.
> so why should the computing speed of a GPU be compared to that of a human?
Because, believe it or not, we built computers to replace humans. The very point of computing was because humans are "SLOW" to do mundane computations, repeatedly, with 100% efficiency and not be subjected to biological functions like wanting to eat, sleep or shit. So there is a direct connection between the computing speed and human replacement. There used to be a time where CPU computing speed was touted in terms of how many humans it replaced... IBM's 1951 Electronic Calculator ad about "150 extra engineers" makes the point. We have ALWAYS built computing as a proxy to human replacement. Heck, even AI is touted to replace humans by the very same people who are training the models.
Now it is quite ridiculous to then turn around and ask why should computing speed of a GPU be compared to that of a human. It is literally the building block of model training/evals/inference. The very basis for automation that is replacing humans. Obviously people are going to relate the two together.
> And you do not think that comparing weights to measure bridge load makes a lot more sense than comparing FLOPS to determine learning of GPUs vs humans?
Come on you are clutching at straws here. It is not about "making sense". It is about using a metric to equalize unequal entities. When I am already saying they are unequal and have no direct relation to each other and any relation can only be arrived at indirectly. FLOPS is just an example I gave. I am not saying we should literally go with the FLOPS example itself. But we can use any metric and equalize it with human work. That's all I am getting it. It is the same argument as Horse-power.
Also comparing weights to measure bridge load is the exact same thing. Do you question how a human being gained enough weight to become 100 kgs? Do you question how a truck that has a dead weight of 0.5 ton became 1 ton? No you do not. You do not care about the process of how some entity gained the weight it did. You only care about what can be measured at that instant of time and how much of that passes through the bridge. It doesn't matter if the weight is gained by consuming calories or by loading boxes if the end goal is use of a bridge. Same way, it doesn't matter how the GPU learns something vs how human learns something if the end goal is knowledge generation.
> So you want to compare the learning rate of a GPU to that of a human by comparing their respective FLOPS. Why would FLOPS be a valid proxy for learning ability in humans just because that works out in GPUs,
Because that is the only metric we can use to measure how quickly GPUs can process arithmetic (you can label it "training" or "learning" or whatever name you want). There is no other metric that is deterministic and comparable to something humans do (which is also process arithmetic).
> if the way they learn is fundamentally different?
It does not matter if how they learn is fundamentally different. Automobiles use an engine to move around. Humans use legs. We both are still taxed. Automobiles are taxed on metrics like HP/CC etc. Humans are taxed via betterment taxes while purchasing property and yearly property tax. The point I am making is that it is not free to ride an automobile on the roads which are built for pedestrians fundamentally. Hence why "right of way" is for pedestrians first and foremost. Because roads existed before automobiles or any animal-drawn cart ever existed. We figured out a way to tax automobiles by way of metrics that is deterministic and quantifiable. You may ask why should cars be taxed on HP/CC while humans are not taxed on their legs etc. That is totally missing the point being made.
> Is the effect of someone reading a copyrighted book dependent on how fast they are at doing math in their head?
It is fundamentally math. Every physical law in the Universe is expressed and backed by math. So on a fundamental level, yes "reading" is essentially maths only. I hope you agree that reading/comprehension is essentially maths at play. How your brain computes (see how this word is valid in this context?), stores and evaluates incoming knowledge is all mathematical in nature. On a fundamental level it is the same thing with GPUs as well. It is just maths. GPUs are great at extreme parallelized computation while human brains are serial and slow at computation. So both can be compared and taxed accordingly.
How much to tax you ask? Each GPU has capability to do the same task 3.56 quadrillion people would do on a mathematical level. It is absolutely fair to ask AI companies to fund the survival of the entire human race (which is 8 billion+ people and far, far less than 3.56 quadrillion) which it seeks to replace with robots and automation. That is the perfect amount of tax they can pay. And funnily enough, irrespective of whether I ask for it or not, they will have to come up with some form of UBI if they themselves have to sustain and pay their shareholders. Because a jobless World will not be able to use their products anyways.
> EDIT: The reason I am comparing chip computation to human-power is because the authors of those digital works intended their works to only be read by humans. Not by some alien species (even if it be made of silicon) that incorporated their work into producing models.
News to me. That would be incredibly xenophobic of them if they did, and deserves to be called out.
> News to me. That would be incredibly xenophobic of them if they did, and deserves to be called out.
What do you mean? Xenophobia does not mean what you think it means, especially so in this context. Also, every creator/producer of content has rights on who/what has access to his/her produced work. It is not xenophobia. And it is definitely not xenophobic to call out stealing of copyrighted works.
EDIT: Let me clarify this further. A recent court ruling (in US) established that ONLY humans can be authors of copyrightable works. As a consequence of that assertion, it can be safely concluded that consumers of the copyrightable work MUST ONLY be humans as well. Else it would be, using your own words, "xenophobic" against humans to have their copyrightable works be consumed by any species (other than humans) while the reverse is not recognized by Law.
> A recent court ruling (in US) established that ONLY humans can be authors of copyrightable works. As a consequence of that assertion, it can be safely concluded that consumers of the copyrightable work MUST ONLY be humans as well.
"United States copyright law protects only works of human creation". That means the source of creation of any work has to be from a human being for it to be copyrightable. Machine-generated output is not copyrightable and is public domain by default. If you, for example, use Claude to generate code for you, for any project (be it private or public), it is automatically public domain and you have no way to claim copyright over that generated work. It can be used by anyone (including the AI provider) to further train models or heck duplicate your work with zero consequences. So it is a violation of primary producer of copyright work (which was used in training models) as neither was he/she compensated for use of the work, but subsequent derivations (generated work) even strip of his/her legal protections as guaranteed by Constitution of various countries (in US copyright law applies only to human beings). So naturally it follows that copyrightable work can only be consumed by humans. Machine-generated code is not on the same footing. It is violating copyright law.
Do you not think that stealing requires the original owner to lose access?
If I sneak into your home, take apart the coffee machine, measure everything, put it back together and go home and build a copy to have my own, did I steal your coffee machine?
Can we not just stick to calling it copyright infringement?
> Do you not think that stealing requires the original owner to lose access?
No.
> If I sneak into your home, take apart the coffee machine, measure everything, put it back together and go home and build a copy to have my own, did I steal your coffee machine?
Not mine. But the company that made the coffee machine. It is stealing IP.
> Can we not just stick to calling it copyright infringement?
It is just a fancy way of saying you stole someone's IP. You can call it infringement if it makes you feel good. But the act is the same end of the day.
I would not classify sunshine and air as "free". Sunshine requires the Sun to undergo continuous fusion. It is invaluable as opposed to "free". Air is invaluable asset too. Without both we would be dead. The price of both is literally price of my being alive every second of my existence.
Public domain on the other hand is legally only possible if/when copyright has expired. That means the owner has enjoyed proceeds from copyright protection for more than his own lifetime. That is fair. It is still not comparable.
EDIT: since you tacked on more like "wind, gravity, radioactivity" etc, I would still not classify them as "free". They are invaluable to very existence of life.
"Knowledge passed on" is also after someone (in ancestry) has paid for it through blood, sweat and tears. It isn't "free". "Public domain" is legally recognized form of "knowledge passed on".
> some interpretation of the Vedic texts, which doesn't actually entail all that much
If you studied the Vedas you would know why this issue exists in the first place. The Vedas talk of One Supreme Brahman who should be given Havis during a Yajna. The dispute between the sects is on who the Supreme Brahman is identified as. Every name in the Vedas is but a name of the Supreme. Vyasa composed the Brahma Sutras to unravel it. But then, as is the case with Dharmics, we have around 30+ commentaries on the Brahma Sutras itself. This, coupled with commentaries on Prasthanatrayi as well as interpretation of Puranas created sects.
All of them come within the umbrella term of Hinduism as all of it is Dharmic and native to the Indian subcontinent.
reply