Are they downloading parquet files and running analyses locally, or are they connecting to Iceberg-like data lake and leveraging DuckDBs query engine capabilities or have you exposed an interface (REST, UI) to query your data?

If so, now I understand why they didn't want to release this model

Regarding distillation, you can also say Anthropic and OpenAI stole /distilled books, articles, blogs from everyone who published things without knowing their work might be used against them

It's much easier to buy politicians in US, e.g. Elon bought POTUS for ~200M, Anthropic revenue is 40B, imagine what they can do

Let me be blunt and let me say: you don't understand why we people support Chinese models.

1. Chinese labs started with open weight models, US labs started with dooms day narrative

2. US VC based companies must become greedy to win and return the money, Chinese companies can make 1/10 of that revenue and still be happy

3. Meta in this case, started nicely with Llama, then switched to closed models, kicked out researchers to build data labeler CEO empire inside Meta. Now opening again, what's next? closing again?

Just like it supported 'Open AI'?

thanks

One thing I wonder is, do you mentally 'fight back' monotonicity of your interactive tool? All seem to be in 3D space, with low-poly, like in a factory moving through the belt and giving you an information + textual description to read more

But sometimes you want to visualize the charts, or graph of simulations, or maybe even the parts of an item in the rocket.

I am sure VCs are fighting to invest and they will get 4B investment immediately with this team

If you threaten to leave the UK, sure go ahead, your market will be filled quickly. Same for Palantir.

* if fully automated agentic delivery was pushed by C-levels to save eng cost - they must be responsible

* if code was written with AI assisted tools, then engineer is responsible

* if engineering manager and PMs pushed hard to release the feature with cutting too much scope, then they should be responsible.

BUT we don't live in ideal world, so here is what would happen (timeline):

* incident started, and getting too costly

* CTO, then eventually CEO joins the incident meeting and starts teaching people how to handle incidents

* incident will cost some money (or multiple of them), post mortem will contain non-sense to hide issues, because they can't blame C-level for pushing their shiny automated JIRA ticket closer agent

* CEO announces layoffs, says sorry, takes all the responsibility for this issue, but kicks off 40% of the team

* We are hiring...

Yeah sure, have you been in incidents costing millions of dollars because CEO pushed something to deliver fast and same CEO sitting on incident meeting and shouting to everyone why can't they fix this dumb incident?

But it might be not good for human brains, because we trained our brains with these problems and our brain optimized search space in some ways, and yes, we also couldn't solve some these problems.

Now imagine someone gets stuck with a problem which could become its own theory, but they will solve it with LLMs and move on to solve their primary problem, because they don't realize how other problem was a big deal. If theory is not formalized, then it won't contribute to the search space for other person, solving different problem.

All in all:

* people's brain will be shaped differently

* we will lose search space optimizations in our brains

* we lose new theory contributions, which increases the search space to help solve other problems