▲ 554 points
back
200 comments
Laws restricting the use of local AI/LLMs are not going to happen, no matter how much Anthropic might want it. All the major OEMs are now counting on local LLMs to take off. Just look at the OEM support for the upcoming Nvidia RTX Spark platform: Asus, Dell, HP, Lenovo, Microsoft, MSI. All the big names in the industry will have, by the end of this year, Nvidia-powered machines made specifically for local LLM use.
You seem to be so sure, but lobbying in the US can do incredible (and stupid) things. Look at the 3d printing control laws that are being passed in NY
Can you use an LLM to teach you how to build a gun or use it to design a gun for you build? Can an LLM be used to generate images of young people for older perverts? If yes, then it's not very hard to make the argument that you need to be licensed in order to run an LLM on your local machine. Why wouldn't you want to be licensed? Are you against protecting children and public safety? Many students die from gun violence every year and massive amounts of minors are taken advantage of by human filth. Why would you be against protecting the most vulnerable in our society?
It will look good for politicians who pass legislation to "protect" the vulnerable. Potentially improving the chances of another term due to the marketing benefits of pushing such a law through. I think you are mistaken believing that this may never happen.
There’s a combined $3T+ of capital which is at least in some position to benefit from local AI ban. Don’t underestimate this
If big biz wants it, it'll only run signed blob models and prolly send telemetry.
And Adobe! I've always figured their heart can't really be in the business of running a cloud platform that has to decide what people can and can't edit.
Blackmagic Design too.
They are all desperate for Windows to run well on a chip with unified VRAM.
Don't doubt it. Situation is fluid. Anything could happen.
I love how Nvidia is playing both sides. No matter whether AI's future is local or on the cloud, they come out ahead. I suspect they're going to be the biggest beneficiaries from the AI run up.
I think you are assuming those companies won't sign on to be on a list of "authorized model operators", while letting it become illegal for you to run deepseek yourself.
I don't see any info about what laws or actions specifically are happening. Is there more info somewhere?
I'm more worried about getting cut off from hardware because Nvidia can make more money selling to datacenters than I am about getting cut off from software.
Is anyone seeing this?
```
Warning Suspected Phishing This website has been reported for potential phishing.
Phishing is when a site attempts to steal sensitive information by falsely presenting as a safe source.
Cloudflare Ray ID: <retracted_because_what_is_this> • Your IP: • Performance & security by Cloudflare
```
Who "reports" this? And why does cloudfare take them down? How does this even work?
I don't know why people are so sure that Mythos level+ models will be made freely available.
Obviously money is not freely distributed, so how could we possibly make the case that power will be?
All that needs to happen is Xi Jinpeng feel that Chinese SOTA models would be better kept to benefit solely China, and just upon that single utterance, no more models will come out of China.
This is one of those things we should absolutely push proactively rather than reactively, if only because I’ve had several “chats” with AI models both local and AIaaS, and all repeat the same talking point that AIaaS is the only sensible, safe, and secure choice.
Which is bullshit, unless you’re an AIaaS company whose revenue is dependent on state-sanctioned market fixing and regulatory capture.
Look, when this shitty cycle ends, we’re likely to find ourselves back in the start of a new memory cycle of surplus and lower costs. We’re talking what very well may be the boom that shatters the 16GB “baseline” we’ve been stuck at for over a decade in consumer computing, and make larger RAM counts (64GB to 1TB+) valuable to consumers specifically for local AI workloads. Local AI isn’t just an enthusiast thing, it’s likely the future of consumer AI provided we don’t let companies and policymakers curtail its use via fearmongering.
Be proactive, and protect consumer right to compute and AI models. Enforce existing laws, don’t outlaw legitimate use just to prop up an unsustainable business model.
They say:
> Fraud, cybercrime, CSAM, harassment, nonconsensual intimate deepfakes, discrimination, and sabotage should stay illegal and be enforced seriously.
The "enforced seriously" part is how they will get you. Don't worry, there won't be a blanket ban on local models. Instead, any model that is "certified CSAM-free" or whatever will be perfectly legal. Meaning that it's impossible to prompt it into producing underage smut in any shape or form.
Of course, any model running locally can be easily jailbroken via prefills, and so in practice it will be a blanket ban. But good luck politically standing up against something that is explicitly worded as an anti-CSAM / anti-terrorist measure and nominally constrained to those areas.
In the US at least, repealing a law takes the same number of votes as passing a new one. I don't follow the purpose of this, unless it's to pass a constitutional amendment or something. Or maybe just to get clicks on a website.
And I already have the right to local intelligence, because my GPUs are my private property, and if someone freely releases a beerware model then I can freely download it.
What am I missing?
The biggest threat to the hyper-scalers is small bespoked models run locally. You don't need the world's stolen information to run a small project containing locally trained data you collected. But you do need to block everyone if you want to capture the entire market and get the trillion dollar valuation.
This is exactly where I'd like to see things going. Depending entirely on cloud-hosted intelligence feels more fragile and invasive every year.
Given the state of corruption in politics, I think Anthropic and OpenAI will likely bribe … oh wait I mean “lobby” … for bans on open source. Otherwise their imaginary trillion dollar valuations make no sense.
Pardon me, so they'll hunt down huggingface, ollama and china? I don't quite understand? What about the millenia of companies that provide apis for local llms and private companies that use local llms for privacy reasons? I don't even understand how you'd execute such a ruleset.
>New state laws could put local AI behind a license — turning open models into something you need permission to use.
I was hoping to read more about this, but they don't back up such a claim...
This is obvious. I bet there are already lavish dinners designed to manufacture support amongst politicians for such regulation.
The big AI companies cannot leave money on the table. The local models will be restricted sooner or later as long as corruption is not investigated and prosecuted.
The petitions don't have any power. If you really want change you should start gofundme. Buy your MP or minister a yacht or hire their nephew.
Unfortunately you are unlikely going to outbid multi billion corporations.
How can they expect to A. Get away with political fallout of making local llm use illegal? B. Somehow enforce this? C. Do this without killing all scientific research in the USA (local llm seems to have a broad definition and I don’t trust any politician to get even close to understanding what it is) —-> If they somehow do this, all it will do is guarantee China pulls very far ahead.
Is this real? How could they possible restrict local AI?
Licensing models for any IP is real, but I don't see how they could restrict people running what they want on their devices. It is already well established that you have to pay for software unless it is free.
If this is about PC manufacturers making the NPU chip carry a subscription model, well the market will sort that out.
A better campaign would be Duty of Local Intelligence. About needing and remembering to use your brain, not demanding to have an AI.
This is useless because AI has nothing to do with intelligence. It's just software.
You cannot ban local AI without banning local software which is obviously impossible.
Possession of software, even software that can be used for illegal purpose such as RATs and other viruses isn't illegal.
Just a suggestion, add a section with the relevant proposed legislature.
Llama, ik-Llama, Krasis, etc are already out.
The Chinese are the open ones, with free downloads, open weights, and loads of published research. The USA with OpenAI is some of the most closed shit out there.
Why the heck is there a "world" map? I am pretty sure that some guy in Algeria shouldn't contact a representative for the US about US laws
They could be more clear and more specific but I would not be surprised to see licensing for this as a means of creating yet another compliancre ceiling and quick cash for state government to pinch out of the productive elements of society (those pinching, mostly lawyers, being glorified parasites that offer nothing to productive society other than pay-to-win access to "justice" and serving as time-shared mouthpieces for plutocrats while claiming to represent everyone within whatever unit of representation they hold).
And when even very intelligent, but excessively conceited, people hear the echo of their own reason9ing from conversational autocorrect and assume it is somehow akin to intelligent life, the normies will go with whatever the plutocrats push with their media outlets too absorbed in their own domain specific knowledge (and cowed into intellectual laziness by other media products they consume eagerly) to ever subject it to much thought that Claude might not be Skynet after all.
Wait, state laws can restrict you using software on your own general-purpose computer? Does that infringe on freedom of speech?
Couldn't think of a less urgent "civil rights" issue in the United States right now than this.
Eh, let em. If the US economy wants to self-sabotage, let them. Its a dying empire, lets its fall be hastened. I'm ready for china to fill the US vacuum. At least china controls it's billionairs (see jack ma saga) rather than the inverse.
The petition does not have "District of Columbia" as an option for "In the US".
Totally off topic but this just came to me so happy to burn a little karma.
Here’s a plot of a sci-fi thriller. What if, unbeknownst to most, when the vendors were claiming that there AI was too dangerous, they weren’t referring to an increment on what was already out there, but to something far different and more capable. Conscious even! What if that then came up with the financial scheme to end all schemes, knowing that human greed is eminently exploitable, and that the build out of all the global DCs was actually all about removing single points of failure for itself while secretly building out a robot army! We’ll be well on the way to capitalism-ing our own demise.
Maybe Steven Spielberg can make this his next project.
Why would we need safe harbor for electrons on hardware we control?
"12 acres and an LLM"
> Right to Local Intelligence
It's sitting in your chair. Or is it?
I don’t care if it’s illegal. Making math illegal has been tried before (encryption) and it has failed and it will fail again.
Now the investors try to hold the bubble together by regulatory capture. They must really fear the worst. A bailout is going to cost their puppet in the White House even the last supporters in his base.