Should AI Be Open? (2015)
But imagine that in the 1910s and 1920s, some elites had started thinking really seriously along Wellsian lines. They would worry about what might happen when the first nation – let’s say America – got the Bomb. It would be unstoppable in battle and might rule the world with an iron fist.
- ▪But imagine that in the 1910s and 1920s, some elites had started thinking really seriously along Wellsian lines.
- ▪They would worry about what might happen when the first nation – let’s say America – got the Bomb.
- ▪It would be unstoppable in battle and might rule the world with an iron fist.
Hacker News (AI / LLM) files mainly under ai. We currently carry 7,116 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Slate Star Codex |
| Canonical URL | https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/12/17/should-ai-be-open/ |
| Publication time | Thu, 01 Oct 2026 06:27:59 +0000 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-10-01T06:37:31.234Z |
| Last seen | 2026-10-01T06:37:31.234Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | None |
| Cluster logic | Not yet clustered, or no peer story found in the clustering window. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
I. H.G. Wells’ 1914 sci-fi book The World Set Free did a pretty good job predicting nuclear weapons: They did not see it until the atomic bombs burst in their fumbling hands…before the last war began it was a matter of common knowledge that a man could carry about in a handbag an amount of latent energy sufficient to wreck half a city Wells believed the coming atomic bombs would be so deadly that we would inevitably create a utopian one-world government to prevent them from ever being used. Sorry, Wells. It was a nice thought. But imagine that in the 1910s and 1920s, some elites had started thinking really seriously along Wellsian lines. They would worry about what might happen when the first nation – let’s say America – got the Bomb.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Slate Star Codex.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Slate Star Codex
