undefined

points

[-]

By making companies using them "toxic" to touch.

For example: no government contract to any company who uses even one vendor in it's entire chain of dependencies, who uses such open models.

They can extend this further by laying more conditions, such as: any company dealing in this-this field can only use models "officially" approved as "safe". Rest you can guess how easy it would be to get that "safe" rating for such open models.

by qphe957 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Can't wait to distill Deepseek v4 flash to America-1

by nancyminusone7 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Some contractors are already barred from using Claude due to DoD designation back in March as a "supply chain risk"

by tyfon9 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

So now the US companies will be stuck on expensive models while the rest of the world can do things much more cost effective.

I'm not sure the outcome would be beneficial for the US as a whole here. But perhaps that is not their priority.

by freakynit7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

There are many proxy-ways to bypass such restrictions. Of course, the costs will be higher. Providers will spun-up.

by UltraSane7 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Companies could self-host models in secret. It would be hard to stop.

by dgellow7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

The thing is, you don’t need to actually block usage to make something illegal. You make it so toxic that company wants to be seen publicly using open models

by UltraSane7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Companies would secretly use self-hosted models internally because it would give them a enormous cost advantage.

by dgellow6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Sure, companies can indeed do illegal things

by UltraSane5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

But how would the actual weights it be made illegal without violating the 1st amendment?