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

Post by therealdrag0 » Wed, Mar 01, 2023, 4:59 PM UTC

fragsworth wrote: post #305

adamsmith143 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This seems an important article, if for no other reason than it brings the betrayal of its foundational claim still brazenly present in OpenAI's name from the obscurity of HN comments going back years into the public light and the mainstream. The thing is, it's probably a good thing. The "Open" part of OpenAI was always an almost suicidal bad mistake. The point of starting the company was to try and reduce p(doom) o…

I'm curious what you think makes them dangerous?

Post by hot_gril » Wed, Mar 01, 2023, 4:59 PM UTC

est31 wrote: post #99

phtrivier wrote: post #68

The only way this kind of research could be done "in the open" is if it was funded by taxpayers' money. Except we have global corporations with elite fiscal layer teams, but no global government (giant lizzards are always disappointing) - so some global corporation was going to own it in the end, it was a matter of "time" and "US or Chinese". The time is now, he winner is US. Moving on. The next move is for (some) go…

> funded by taxpayers' money. In this industry, a contract with MS is as close to directly having a DOD contract as you can get. Remember when MS bought Skype, turned off end to end encryption and got rid of the P2P mechanisms, to eventually appear in the leaks about PRISM? Likely Bing integration of ChatGPT is the more innocuous use of the technology. Once they have gotten input from the AI experts at OpenAI on how…

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Wed, Mar 01, 2023, 5:02 PM UTC

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…

Post by college_physics » Wed, Mar 01, 2023, 5:07 PM UTC

ly3xqhl8g9 wrote: post #304

college_physics wrote: post #14

"Open" as in "Open for Big Business"? The main reason to worry, though, is not the proprietary monetization of "AI" algorithms: Just like it was not an algorithm (pagerank) but the invention of adtech that spawned surveillance capitalism, here too the main question is what sort of "disruption" can this tech facilitate , as in which social contract will be violated in order to "create value". "Success" in "tech" has f…

I suppose the next step beyond surveillance capitalism , given the application of language models to robotic actuators [1], but also as a general trend, will be jobless capitalism . Nowadays, companies and politicians, if one could make such a distinction just for the sake of the argument, will always tout the "job creation" aspect of a certain capitalistic endeavour. Give it a few months/years and we will hear the p…

Post by deathanatos » Wed, Mar 01, 2023, 5:08 PM UTC

paintman252 wrote: post #307

JeremyNT wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Based" is a catchphrase of the extremely online right. It basically means "cool" but with a subtext of "is annoying to libs/normies who just don't get it." See also "pilled."

That's just not true. I've been in many very online leftist communities and they also freely use it. it's just general internet speak at this point

              Lil B
    (based ≈ doing your own thing (in a good way)
             not swayed by critics)
             ↙           ↘
       Gen Z             4chan
   (based ≈ cool)        ("based and redpilled"
                          ≈"unswayed by pop rhetoric"
                           and "sees the world beyond the 'illusion'", resp.)