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

OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

web.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 70 posts

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#41

Post by ExoticPearTree »

jstummbillig wrote: post #8
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #5

I’ve seen parts of the Congress testimony of Sam Altman amd it felt like the guy was on a power trip with his regulation ideas. What he accomplished with OpenAI is for the history books, but wanting monopoly over AI development in the US makes him look like an up and coming villain.

Nothing that he said in Congress supports the claim that he wants monopoly over AI development. I find it fascinating how people are so happy to turn argumentation on it's head, and pretend it's the same thing. Surely you must know you are doing it? But what is to gain, I do not know.

He wants for Congress to create or use an existing agency to regulate AI with input and regulation ideas from him. And right after that he started enumerating some things that any other AI company should do. For me this points to the idea he want to control AI development at a national level.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#42

Post by ExoticPearTree »

runsWphotons wrote: post #12
jstummbillig wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing that he said in Congress supports the claim that he wants monopoly over AI development. I find it fascinating how people are so happy to turn argumentation on it's head, and pretend it's the same thing. Surely you must know you are doing it? But what is to gain, I do not know.

Asking for regulation soon after your company has gained a substantial (but probably transient) lead in a market sets off people's villain detectors, especially people who have seen the same things before. Sam may not be a villain and may believe in everything he is advocating for pure reasons, but it is right for people to be critical and skeptical. Sam will be okay, he can handle some haters.

What's that saying: die a hero or live long enough to become the villain?

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#44

Post by [deleted] »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #5

I’ve seen parts of the Congress testimony of Sam Altman amd it felt like the guy was on a power trip with his regulation ideas. What he accomplished with OpenAI is for the history books, but wanting monopoly over AI development in the US makes him look like an up and coming villain.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#45

Post by [deleted] »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #5

I’ve seen parts of the Congress testimony of Sam Altman amd it felt like the guy was on a power trip with his regulation ideas. What he accomplished with OpenAI is for the history books, but wanting monopoly over AI development in the US makes him look like an up and coming villain.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#46

Post by rambojohnson »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #5

I’ve seen parts of the Congress testimony of Sam Altman amd it felt like the guy was on a power trip with his regulation ideas. What he accomplished with OpenAI is for the history books, but wanting monopoly over AI development in the US makes him look like an up and coming villain.

sure, one may very well be on the mark regarding Altman's innermost drives. but surely you do realize this revelation does not, in any way, diminish or amplify the argument for oversight. Greater forces are in motion, outstretching the limited realm of OpenAI's fiscal prognostications. Even if we were to consider Altman's motivations as self-serving and myopic, these grand machinations unfolding on the canvas of our society remain undeterred.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#47

Post by usrbinbash »

yyyk wrote: post #16
usrbinbash wrote: post #9

Whether scaling laws hold or not, is up for debate. What isn't up for debate, is that: 1) Giant serverfarms are expensive 2) People want on premises/on machine solutions 3) LoRA Tuning of small models continues to excel 4) Thus specialized models continue to evolve at a fast pace 5) Open source foundation models on which tuning can be done are accelerating by the week 6) Performance doesn't matter once a model is "go…

1) Giant serverfarms are expensive, but Microsoft has money and savings on scale. This can compare favourably to running locally. 2) People use what LLMs software makers give them and don't care at all about on premise. Software makers want something reliable they can deploy at scale, and not end up debugging problems on a client 4GB machine with an iGPU and multitude of OSs. The actually deciding people want to dele…

> 4) but doing product is icky for OSS people for some reason

I am not talking about OSS people. I am talking about integrators. And there is already demand for on premise LLM solutions.

Integrators don't ask customers to `git clone` some repo, same as they don't ask them to familiarize themselves with some cloud providers API. They ask them to buy/use the already integrated product.

> Note that the Stable Diffusion area is in way better shape.

Yes, because integrators got to work wrapping up the OSS into viable products. The same is going to happen with LLMs.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#48

Post by usrbinbash »

anotheryou wrote: post #21

Will the stateful API make things faster or cheaper? Or does it just simplify the API usage? I'd guess mostly the latter, but don't know.

It would simplify the API usage. An LLM model is stateless, and so still needs the complete context presented with every subsequent query.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#49

Post by jstummbillig »

mola wrote: post #22
jstummbillig wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of which is entirely reasonable and so is considering all of Samas possible motivations. But just declaring another parties intentions as you see fit is such an incredibly bad style in any discourse. When filling the gaps of your knowledge, there has to be a world in which Sama is in fact a good human being – in addition to the world where he is not – when that assumption does not logically conflict with anything…

Perhaps, but Altman turned an open non profit org to a for profit closed org. So why should we continue to take his arguments at face value?

You shouldn't but apply special caution towards your own arguments against someone you dislike.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#50

Post by samspenc »

personjerry wrote: post #6

Originally discussed here a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36141544

The only issue with that is the original link has its content redacted at OpenAI or Sam's request, which is why this post has a link to the archive.org version with the original contents.
Post reply on HN