Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 595 posts

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#211

Post by bradleyjg »

tapoxi wrote: post #202
bradleyjg wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They technically didn’t get rid of the non profit but instead formed a partially owned for profit subsidiary. In theory non profits are subject to oversight by the state of incorporation’s attorney general. In practice it’s mostly a free for all.

This is the loophole. It's what Mozilla did (Foundation created Corporation, and moved employees there), and even IKEA is technically owned by a nonprofit (Stichting INGKA Foundation).

The IKEA situation is far more complicated, exploiting gaps in how the laws of several different countries interact.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#212

Post by neom »

permo-w wrote: post #206
neom wrote: post #4

I find it a little odd that Elon seems to take a swipe at OpenAI any opportunity he gets. If he cares so much about them not making money, maybe he should have put his twitter cash there instead? It's reassuring to me that the two people running policy work at the big AI "startups", Jack Clark (Anthropic) and Miles Brundage (OpenAI, who was hired by Jack iirc), are genuinely good humans. I've known Jack for 10 years…

I don't see the problem. he's making some quite valid criticisms of OpenAI. Jesus himself could be in charge of policy work there and that wouldn't change the fact that "Open"AI is anything but open

Two disparate thoughts.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#213

Post by xiphias2 »

prepend wrote: post #113

I like that the corporate bullshit just keeps getting more. Google’s “don’t be evil” is many steps down from openai having open in their name. They should be called Open AI with ( not open) in small print. I argue a lot over “open source” software with non-OSI license and sometimes worry if I’m too pedantic. But I think it’s important to use terms accurately and not to confuse reality more than it already is by calli…

,,I wonder if google and openai truly started out with these ideals and were just corrupted and overpowered by standard organizational greed''

With Google Eric Schmidt explained how it came: quite often when they were breainstorming about product launches, and something looked like it can grow the company, but is immoral to do, some person interrupted: ,,that would be evil''.

As Eric was trying to organize the company, he just added ,,don't be evil'' to company values. Still, he kept it all the way. It's too bad that he was changed after 10 years.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#214

Post by ramesh31 »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #167
newyankee wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything is possible if you are powerful enough and have the world's biggest companies competing for your product. My worry is that even a half baked AI can produce useful wonders in many fields like healthcare, however useful amounts of data will now only be accessible and available to powerful players. Probably OpenAI did the bait and switch to get many competing sides on the same page.

Yuuup. And just like with Facebook, real power ( information ) in the form of ingested data and prompts will be available to people like Altman, Thiel and Musk, while everyone is gushing over being able to build a simple website automatically ( which is arguably cool ). I wish I could trust FB to deliver on their promises, but this community's only hope is to ensure an open source version of gpt exists. edit: To the…

>I wish I could trust FB to deliver on their promises, but this community's only hope is to ensure an open source version of gpt exists.

This is the worrisome part of it all. It's no longer programmer sweat and toil that creates the value, but raw compute, which has a fixed capital cost that cannot be surmounted by skill or dedication. I don't see how, short of massive crowdfunding, open source can possibly release a state of the art LLM.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#215

Post by Veen »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #152
Veen wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know of any open source projects with the approximately $5 million it takes to train GPT3? Do you think the AI scientists who invented the underlying techniques would do so without being paid? No, Google and others paid for these people's work. Even if OpenAI was open source and still a non-profit, its funding would come from the profit generated by corporations and the wealth of individuals who became rich th…

>How do you think Sam Altman, Peter Thiel, and Elon Musk were in a position to found OpenAI in the first place? Wage theft, embezzlement of public funds, socially destructive practices, immoral and downright dangerous behaviors, lies and being children of already wealthy and well connected individuals ? Capitalism didn't give you OpenAI. Money and talented people working on it gave you OpenAI (hint: none of the peopl…

You should probably be little careful about accusing named individuals of embezzlement.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#218

Post by NewLogic »

Taek wrote: post #41
lfkdev wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when was Tesla created to be open-source and non-profit?

They did open source all of their battery patents. Tesla isn't Mozilla, but they do have somewhat of a moral high ground to stand on.

That is marketing spin, his offer was freely licencing their patents in exchange for free usage from other big automakers which he knew would never happen.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#220

Post by kunalgupta »

random314 wrote: post #183
patates wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure they did work hard and the product is innovative from my understanding of the definition of the word but oh boy does the whole "ethics" theater manage to infuriate me...

The worst part is that Altman had nothing to do with the success of Open AI. He simply failed upwards into this job, thanks to his Paul Graham friendship and YC connection. We will see Altman all over the place while all the hardwork was done by actual scientists at Open AI who have barely spoken.

His “YC connection” was running YC and being responsible for making it something like 100 times bigger than it was before him?
Post reply on HN