4 ms·

Qwen is the Alibaba distilled Anthropic Claude model So piracy on an by piracy trained ai model..

cogman10 3mo ago
Piracy? Lol. Alibaba didn't steal Opus weights, they used opus output to train their model. If this is piracy, then so is reverse engineering efforts powering a bunch of Linux drivers.
- cyanydeez 3mo ago
  If that's piracy, I'm going to the library and arresting everyone there! Also, yeah, they already stole their copyrighted works, so a thief from a thief is still...theives?
tommica 3mo ago
Well, Anthropic got paid for it, unlike the sources that they used...
c7b 3mo ago
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Is that a good or a bad thing? Model distillation is presumably part of the reason why Qwen is so good, yes. As a consumer, that's a good thing I would say. It's a natural counterbalance to the monopolistic tendencies of other tech segments. If you have ethical concerns, model distillation feels like an arbitrary line to draw. Why is the first type of piracy ok, the second not? You should restrict yourself to ethical open source models. Which is btw where I genuinely hope the future of local models is going to lie. Open weights is not enough, we need fully open source models to be sustainable. Even for simple things like updating the knowledge cutoff. How we are going to distribute the training effort will be an interesting problem where I don't see an obvious solution yet. Maybe the blockchain/federated learning people can suggest something. Or university consortia, or some public sector solutions. Or something really boring - I for one would absolutely be willing to pay for DRM-free weights of an open source model (even if I could pirate them for free).
- zaphirplane 3mo ago
  Are you saying 2 wrongs make a right
  - c7b 3mo ago
    I'm saying, either you have a problem with the copyright issues related to AI training or you don't. If you do, neither Qwen nor Claude are acceptable, if not then both are. They have similar moral standing to me. Btw, ethically sourced, open source LLMs exist! Check out eg Olmo by Allen AI: https://allenai.org/olmo https://allenai.org/olmo
  - tancop 3mo ago
    in this case yes. stealing from a thief is right if you give all of it back to the victims. with ai the "stealing" is from everyone on the internet, so the only ethical option is making the results open source and available to all. thats exactly what chinese labs are doing. (in general i think piracy or breaking ip laws in general is not morally wrong unless you make money from it, but thats a whole other conversation.)

Piracy? Lol. Alibaba didn't steal Opus weights, they used opus output to train their model. If this is piracy, then so is reverse engineering efforts powering a bunch of Linux drivers.

cyanydeez 3mo ago
If that's piracy, I'm going to the library and arresting everyone there! Also, yeah, they already stole their copyrighted works, so a thief from a thief is still...theives?

tommica 3mo ago

Well, Anthropic got paid for it, unlike the sources that they used...

c7b 3mo ago

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Is that a good or a bad thing? Model distillation is presumably part of the reason why Qwen is so good, yes. As a consumer, that's a good thing I would say. It's a natural counterbalance to the monopolistic tendencies of other tech segments. If you have ethical concerns, model distillation feels like an arbitrary line to draw. Why is the first type of piracy ok, the second not? You should restrict yourself to ethical open source models. Which is btw where I genuinely hope the future of local models is going to lie. Open weights is not enough, we need fully open source models to be sustainable. Even for simple things like updating the knowledge cutoff. How we are going to distribute the training effort will be an interesting problem where I don't see an obvious solution yet. Maybe the blockchain/federated learning people can suggest something. Or university consortia, or some public sector solutions. Or something really boring - I for one would absolutely be willing to pay for DRM-free weights of an open source model (even if I could pirate them for free).

zaphirplane 3mo ago
Are you saying 2 wrongs make a right
- c7b 3mo ago
  I'm saying, either you have a problem with the copyright issues related to AI training or you don't. If you do, neither Qwen nor Claude are acceptable, if not then both are. They have similar moral standing to me. Btw, ethically sourced, open source LLMs exist! Check out eg Olmo by Allen AI: https://allenai.org/olmo https://allenai.org/olmo
- tancop 3mo ago
  in this case yes. stealing from a thief is right if you give all of it back to the victims. with ai the "stealing" is from everyone on the internet, so the only ethical option is making the results open source and available to all. thats exactly what chinese labs are doing. (in general i think piracy or breaking ip laws in general is not morally wrong unless you make money from it, but thats a whole other conversation.)