Live data from Hacker News

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

vice.com

431–440 of 595 posts

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

#431

I don't know much about AI development but does OpenAI really have some secret sauce? Aren't the algorithms mostly public and OpenAI's main advantage was to have enough money to build something? Won't other companies do the same too, just a little later? I feel people like Altman will lose interest once they have sold OpenAI for big money.

This is mostly true, yeah. Although in certain cases OpenAI is indeed pushing research forward themselves (not only using existing algorithms/architectures just at scale) and therefore has first mover's advantage, e.g. with reinforcement-learning-based fine-tuning based on human preferences (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback, RLHF), which is basically the secret sauce which turned the original relatively-dumb GPT-3 (pure language model, "document autocomplete", what is the next most likely token based on my training data) into ChatGPT (what token would a human prefer to come next).

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

#432

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. They've achieved marvellous things, OpenAI, but the pivot and long-standing refusal to deal with it honestly leaves an unpleasant taste, and doesn't bode well for the future, es…

It is nice to see normies noticing and caring, but the article leaves out some details that obscure comments still stubbornly bring up: like Musk founded it as a 501(c)(3) and put Altman in charge, and only once he had to leave with conflicts of interest Altman founded "OpenAI LP," the for-profit workaround so they didn't have to obey those pesky charity rules. That's when they stopped releasing models and weights, a…

It was so obvious when they went full-bore on "AI ethics" that it was a case of legitimate concerns combined with a convenient excuse for massive corporations to claim the mantle of responsibility while keeping their models closed source.

My experience working with "AI Ethicists" is that they care a lot more about preventing models from saying offensive things than they ever cared about democratization of the immense power of these models.

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

#433

OpenAI isn't as open as it used to be, but they still publish papers. The open-source Hadoop was based on Google papers on MapReduce and Google File System. GPT-J and GPT-NeoX are open source models based on OpenAI publications around GPT-3.

Even Apple publishes ML papers. It turns out you can't attract and retain decent research talent unless you allow them to continue racking up their google scholar score

Yes, publishing papers is good. Open source code can be based on methods described in papers. Like, most algorithms in sklearn for example.

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

#434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For long form, I’d suggest cold-takes blog who is very systematic thinker and has been focusing on agi risk recently. https://www.cold-takes.com

I see a lot of "we don't know how it works therefore it could destroy all of us" but that sounds really handwavy to me. I want to see some concrete examples of how it's dangerous.

Are people dangerous? Yes or no question.

Do we have shitloads of regulations on what people can or cannot do? Yes or no question.

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

#435
At some point the U.S. government should step up and provide some resources, and offer large datasets for open acess training and pretrained models. In the future, there will be many AI models for various purposes, closed source, guarded, with their moat being the costs to train a similar model on a dataset of similar breadth. This eliminates smaller orgs from ever being able to offer a competing model, and ruins innovation by gatekeeping who is allowed to innovate.

This is exactly the sort of role government is made for. To uplift the collective using the power the collective possess as a massive meta organism. Opening up access to these models will allow our developers to compete against the world and dominate in this space, much like how international researchers in other fields often leave their home countries for the U.S. to get at the resources needed to even engage in cutting edge research (such as institutional access to equipment, compute, data, and research funding that simply doesn't exist in other places).

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

#436
post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see a lot of "we don't know how it works therefore it could destroy all of us" but that sounds really handwavy to me. I want to see some concrete examples of how it's dangerous.

Are people dangerous? Yes or no question. Do we have shitloads of regulations on what people can or cannot do? Yes or no question.

Sometimes yes, and sometimes yes.

I can be convinced, I just want to see the arguments.

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

#437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possible. Coding as we know it might get obsolete. And it is a trillion dollar industry.

> Coding as we know it might get obsolete. And it is a trillion dollar industry. freeing up that many knowledge workers to do other things will grow the economy, not shrink it, a new industrial revolution

That's an excellent point that I don't think is made enough. The great pay and relative freedom software engineering provides the technically-minded people of the world is great for us, yet starves many other important fields from more technical innovation because of not enough workers in those fields.

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

#438
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…

This "not doing harm" narrative is very grating. It's just another transparent and self-serving attempt by a company to co-opt progressive vernacular to justify whatever questionable policy they have as a moral imperative. This is the corporate equivalent of "think of the children". A justification that could have been used to gate-keep any and all aspects of computer science, and one that isn't even logically consis…

Based

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

#439
post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Based" is slang for "cool" or "in" that's common on 4chan, but I believe has its origins in the 90s offline on 4chan it's largely used to mean something along the lines of "fitting the 4chan anti-groupthink groupthink"

I do recall people saying based a lot in the 90s, it meant based in reality.

this sounds much more plausible than the sibling comment's "based on your own beliefs", but plausibility is not necessarily correctness

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

#440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is, but it is weird given the history he has. He was kicked out of Paypal because he wanted to use the MS tech stack instead of LAMP at the time. Now some decades later here he is.

You've got the story wrong. He wasn't kicked out because of the stack debate, but because he sold PP to eBay (making enough money in the process to fund Tesla and SpaceX).

huh? it was Peter Thiel the acting CEO when the sale was done - right after removing Musk for said migration to MS stack.
Post reply on HN