Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | blobbers's commentslogin

Why is this post flagged?

Fastest growing charities. Oh wait, no he weaseled out of that.

The crazy thing about Sam Altman is that he's basically a deal maker; does it remind you of anyone currently in power? No substance, no skill, just wheeling dealing, constantly saving his own neck from things that really should have ended his career.

Read: https://www.paulgraham.com/fundraising.html

" Sam Altman has it. You could parachute him into an island full of cannibals and come back in 5 years and he'd be the king. "

Meanwhile America is having no Kings protests.


Hilarious how there's vigorous discussion happening under a post with 200 votes and 100 comments, while it's been flagged the whole time.

> No substance, no skill, just wheeling dealing

That's their only real skill. There's an entire class of people who specialize in exploiting society's hard work.


I think one thing I liked when I was in start-ups was working for folks straight out of grad school that genuinely cared about a problem, had some advanced knowledge about a topic and were just trying to turn it into a business.

I felt like those were the kind of folks I could get on board with; not someone with an MBA that needs head count to reach their KPIs. Someone that cared about solving a problem and was genuinely smart.


TLDR; this is an alibaba funded start-up out of Beijing

Okay, I'm sorry but I have to say wtf named this thing. Moonshot AI is such an overused generic name that I had to ask an LLM which company this is. This is just Alibaba hedging their Qwen model.

This company is far from "open source", it's had over $1B USD in funding.


> Moonshot AI is such an overused generic name that I had to ask an LLM which company this is

I just googled "Moonshot AI" and got the information right away. Not sure what's confusing about it, the only other "Moonshot" I know of is Alphabet's Moonshot Factory.

> This company is far from "open source", it's had over $1B USD in funding.

Since when does open source mean you can't make any money? Mozilla has a total of $1.2B in assets. The company isn't open source nor claiming to be.

This model was released under a "modified MIT-license" [0]:

> Our only modification part is that, if the Software (or any derivative works thereof) is used for any of your commercial products or services that have more than 100 million monthly active users, or more than 20 million US dollars (or equivalent in other currencies) in monthly revenue, you shall prominently display "Kimi K2" on the user interface of such product or service.

Which sounds pretty fair to me.

[0] - https://huggingface.co/moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Thinking/blob/main...


> This company is far from "open source", it's had over $1B USD in funding.

Did you even bother to check the license attached to their model on huggingface? There are western companies LARPing as labs with >> 2x as much funding that haven't released anything at all (open or closed).


We should probably enact harsher laws on drug smugglers / narco traffickers. A lot of asian countries have essentially declared the death penalty to drug importers.

The administration wants to see results and it would seem that the problem is that the American judicial systems is set up to simply cost money, which is something narcos have.

If you take a cartel to court, they just have a lawyer tie up your law team. We've made the mistake of allowing capitalism to influence too many of our systems of government from judicial (cost of lawyers) to electoral (advertisement costs and political campaigning). Isn't this the problem?


I think its an interesting conundrum because you're right it is the same as what you said!

They don't tell us the due diligence they do, but we would hope that our bureaucracy is careful about who they target and carefully thinks about how it affects the perception of americans vs. the potential benefit to our society (elimination of narco traffickers)?

Ukraine / Russia aside, we no longer have much in the way of conventional wars where each team wears a certain color and they shoot at each other. Instead the weaker force tries to disguise itself as best possible and strike when possible. In this case, a drug cartel would try to be as under the radar as possible.

What level of due diligence would you need to see before you would trust that a strike is justified? Or is the problem that narco trafficking doesn't justify death and therefore they should simply be imprisoning traffickers?

On the subject of evidence, the problem with AI is that now video and imagery can easily be faked. You've always been able to plant a bag of weed on a teenager and arrest him, so planting a kilo of coke on a boat and arresting someone is no different.

Malaysia, Philippines, China, Singapore all punish drug related crimes with death. One could argue that the societal impact of drugs is incredibly bad, thus warranting death to the traffickers.

Without a doubt, helping addicts is a societally very challenging problem! Anyone who has had a loved one fall victim to addiction has dealt with the struggle of emotions that comes with it. A need for them to be better, but lacking the path forward when they regress. Simply removing the drugs from the equation would have never destroyed their lives.

At some point it fundamentally needs to come down to trusting the people who defend the country ... who are entrusted to do this most difficult job.


Pretty sure I get re-targeted by ads for various versions of this for weeks on end after I do a single google search for a new toothpaste.

Usually the safety profiles of those companies are very very very bad, but probably reference very good research.


My professor in college said he designed grain silo software control algos to prevent mold but maximize water retention (weight) in corn.

Apparently when you're in the bulk business, selling water is a good business, but if you lose x% of your water in your corn you're out an equivalent portion of your revenue.

If the corn goes moldy, you may be out more. Hence the optimization.


Usually if you have to add 'science' to a term its not science.


We do that incredibly often just to refer to only one part of an incredibly broad concept of "science." Sometimes they get unique terms like "physics" or "chemistry," but not always. This is not a rule that can accurately be applied to all terms matching the pattern "____ science."


Wait…so you’re saying computer science isn’t science? /s


What we call science is short for natural science. Science just comes from the Latin word for knowledge. Different disciplines have different ways of building knowledge. That doesn't necessarily make one better or worse.


Computer science?


How many folks in Meta AI division? (Is it 600? 650? Is it 600? 1200? 12000?)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: