So, any solution to this “problem” must include ALL open-weight models. As far as I understand this is exactly what they intend to do. Axios article linked in the post mentions that. As in this quote:

“The source described leading AI labs or their allies approaching the administration every 3-5 months with an idea to ban open-source models.”

It doesn’t say “Chinese” open-source models. Because they already know that it’s not feasible. Any regulation must cover all the models.

Now there are solutions for that latter problem. But they are all ugly and restrictive. Making a DRM-like license protection system mandatory can be a solution. If a company wants to run an open model in their own servers, they can only use approved and certified pure “American” models. This of course creates a monopoly for the big labs who are authorized to train and distribute such “open” models. A company can fine-tune the model for its own needs but of course can’t distribute the derivative model.

I’m sure there are other solutions but all of them would be equally ugly. Also these regulations can’t be enforced to other countries easily so only Americans will be restricted.

So what open weight models do is at least provide a baseline of inference cost to add some sanity to the price markers. And of course predictability too--if you really want Kimi K2 instead of K3 you can still use it.

So the competitive pressure and predictability offered by open models is helpful for users

To be fair, OpenAI has released a couple of (then very good) OSS models. I run the 20B version at home and it is excellent for reviewing text and common tasks like drafting bash scripts. There is a larger 120B that you can't realistically run on consumer hardware at reasonable tok/s too. I wish OpenAI updated these models more frequently though.

Might make sense eventually. Same logic as companies working on Linux. "An AI model is a business necessity. But making an AI model is so expensive we should not make our own. So let's just use the open one, and contribute the stuff that we need."

Honestly imo this is just proof apple will win in the end. Eventually a phone will be able to run a model good enough to do most things and it then is game over.

It baffles me that anyone can seriously believe that China is going to put its Mythos successor on Hugging Face and let us all strip the guardrails etc.

Things just didn't turn out the way OpenAI and Anthropic thought; nor did they turn out the way China thought.

Now, here is an idea that I have not heard before... and I think there is some merit to this. This is also the sort of thing that a state (looking at you CA, CO, IL, NY) could do, instead of just the federal government.

What is your stack (harness, model) and how much do you pay per month?

How would you compare your experience to a typical subsidized plan like Claude Code + Pro plan?

I’m asking because i keep hearing that open weight models are cheap and efficient - is that really the case in practice?

What's the incentive for the Chinese labs to continue releasing weights 5 years from now? It's not a stable equilibrium and cannot last.

- The lab spending large sums on research and training does not get the inference revenue to fund those efforts.

- Unlike OSS where a single volunteer can keep a project going, training costs run into the $billions.

- OSS is often a two way street where features and integrations are built that the original author benefits from. Open weight models are largely a one way street because the marginal benefit is so much less than training costs.

In the short term, it means Chinese labs can attract talent and, I suspect, funding from their gov. Similar to every other industry the CCP subsidized to take over.

oh now i see, the Chinese government is funding the training and release of their best models to pressure OpenAI, Anthropic, and others to do the same for competition's sake. I don't buy it, this seems more like a way to get SOTA models RL'd to comply with Chinese government approved information distribution. If I have to trust a black box of answers to questions i would trust one from a US for-profit publicly traded company subject to market forces over one approved, and heavily subsidized, by the Chinese government.

I'm sorry to do that hn comment thing where we all just race to contradict or talk in opposition of whatever was said before. I'm aware. But really guys, was this article really not just a miss?

[1] https://adaptive.live

Once the weights are out, it makes no sense to ban them in the US while the rest of the world takes advantage of it. But that doesn't mean developers of frontier models shouldn't take steps to prevent their weights from being stolen.