There's a narrative shift happening where companies like OpenAI are trying to protect themselves from claims of training on their outputs, despite many AI startups having trained on OpenAI outputs without facing bans.

Research models at the Allen Institute for AI use OpenAI APIs for understanding post-training, and they will identify themselves as being trained by OpenAI unless specified otherwise.

OpenAI and many companies trained on internet text without permission, creating a loophole where data generated from OpenAI can be uploaded and used by others without violating terms of service.

The term 'competitor' is unclear in the AI space, leading to ethical questions about the hypocrisy of training on internet text while restricting others from using OpenAI's outputs.

OpenAI has stated that DeepSeek uses their API, and there are claims that it is a distilled model trained on OpenAI's outputs, raising questions about OpenAI's terms of service that prohibit building competitors with outputs from their models.

Just because a model is open-sourced doesn't mean it can't be subverted; there have been instances of backdoors in open source software that could also apply to AI models.

Despite criticisms, OpenAI and DeepMind have been transparent about their methodologies, making it easier for others to replicate models like GPT-3 if they can secure enough compute and talent.

The preparation and understanding of what AI can do is becoming increasingly important as open models continue to emerge, regardless of attempts to stop them.

Open-source AI models, like those released by Deepseek, are closing the gap with proprietary models, and Google has also released competitive open-source models.