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

What OpenAI really wants

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 190 posts

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#111

Post by gumballindie »

rurp wrote: post #108
gumballindie wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and force most of humanity to dramatically alter their lives History tells us that when that happends it's their lives that get dramatically altered. See what happened in europe with most dictators and kings that didn't please the masses long enough.

I could certainly see it being an unstable enough situation that it leads to a violent revolt, but that doesn't do much to allay my fears. Maybe I'm getting old but I really don't want to live through a violent revolution, even if I'm on the side of the revolutionaries. Heading the problem off before it gets to that point would be much more pleasant.

> Heading the problem off before it gets to that point would be much more pleasant.

Agreed. And the first step in the right direction is ensuring they stop stealing people’s ip.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#112

Post by oarabbus_ »

trwaw wrote: post #82
samvher wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you say more? It sounds like you're referring to more than just the contamination of the word "open".

They are trying to make training weights of models into munitions, like encryption was in the 80s. That is worse for open source development of models than anything anyone else has done including Amazon. The best thing that can happen is that Altman et al are hit by a bus on the way to their next meeting with a head of state trying to legislate them being the only responsible censor and natural monopolist for Ai.

You don't think it's a little uncalled for to wish physical harm and/or death on someone just because you disagree with their actions?

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#113

Post by oarabbus_ »

mkii wrote: post #78
reducesuffering wrote: post #53

In this thread, people accuse Sam Altman of pursuing purely financial gain while he holds no equity in OpenAI.

Even the regular employees don't get equity https://www.levels.fyi/blog/openai-compensation.html

Every job posting on their website states "Total compensation also includes generous equity and benefits."

https://openai.com/careers

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#114

Post by dragonwriter »

oarabbus_ wrote: post #112
trwaw wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are trying to make training weights of models into munitions, like encryption was in the 80s. That is worse for open source development of models than anything anyone else has done including Amazon. The best thing that can happen is that Altman et al are hit by a bus on the way to their next meeting with a head of state trying to legislate them being the only responsible censor and natural monopolist for Ai.

You don't think it's a little uncalled for to wish physical harm and/or death on someone just because you disagree with their actions?

> You don't think it's a little uncalled for to wish physical harm and/or death on someone just because you disagree with their actions?

Kind of depends what the actions are: “Leaving your turn signal on after you have completed a lane change maneuver” and “carrying out a genocide” are both actions one might disagree with.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#115

Post by trwaw »

oarabbus_ wrote: post #112
trwaw wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are trying to make training weights of models into munitions, like encryption was in the 80s. That is worse for open source development of models than anything anyone else has done including Amazon. The best thing that can happen is that Altman et al are hit by a bus on the way to their next meeting with a head of state trying to legislate them being the only responsible censor and natural monopolist for Ai.

You don't think it's a little uncalled for to wish physical harm and/or death on someone just because you disagree with their actions?

[flagged]

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#116

Post by mensetmanusman »

stale2002 wrote: post #101
methodical wrote: post #99

I'm sorry- perhaps the intention and wording of the article changes towards the end, but this entire thing as far as I've managed is just a thinly veiled propaganda piece that tries to make OpenAI, the team, and their product out to be some kind of equivalent to a modern day messiah. For me, and everybody I've seen or recently discussed it with, the whole ChatGPT craze has largely died out, and all we're left with is…

> I've managed to make it is just a thinly veiled propaganda piece that tries to make OpenAI, the team, and their product out to be some kind of equivalent to a modern day messiah I don't agree at all. The article itself is giving a pretty neutral overview of the company and what the company believe to be the case, for sure. It is OpenAI who thinks that skynet is going to be created, and that they need to be the gate…

If they hadn’t believe what they did, they wouldn’t have built what they did. Google was sitting on gold and had no idea.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#117

Post by mensetmanusman »

ugjka wrote: post #51

> Riding with Altman, I can almost hear the ringing, ambiguous chord that opens “A Hard Day’s Night”—introducing the future. Last November, when OpenAI let loose its monster hit, ChatGPT, it triggered a tech explosion not seen since the internet burst into our lives. Suddenly the Turing test was history, search engines were endangered species, and no college essay could ever be trusted. No job was safe. No scientific…

Sometimes it’s a matter of communication style with the LLM, some communicators mesh much better.

If you think the info is general enough to be embedded, there is probably a skill to finagle it out.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#118

Post by stonogo »

mkii wrote: post #83
stonogo wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Irrelevant. The non-profit is controlled by the same people, and only existed to class their massive startup capital as 'donations.'

Do you have any source to this? If this were the motive, why would more VCs not require their corporates to be formed as non-profits?

Because the donors didn't know the company was going to pivot to private. If VCs did that deliberately it would be completely illegal.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#119

Post by mensetmanusman »

trwaw wrote: post #82
samvher wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you say more? It sounds like you're referring to more than just the contamination of the word "open".

They are trying to make training weights of models into munitions, like encryption was in the 80s. That is worse for open source development of models than anything anyone else has done including Amazon. The best thing that can happen is that Altman et al are hit by a bus on the way to their next meeting with a head of state trying to legislate them being the only responsible censor and natural monopolist for Ai.

If time travelers aren’t trying to take out tech ceos, then it means we are okay.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#120

Post by miki123211 »

ugjka wrote: post #51

> Riding with Altman, I can almost hear the ringing, ambiguous chord that opens “A Hard Day’s Night”—introducing the future. Last November, when OpenAI let loose its monster hit, ChatGPT, it triggered a tech explosion not seen since the internet burst into our lives. Suddenly the Turing test was history, search engines were endangered species, and no college essay could ever be trusted. No job was safe. No scientific…

I can justify paying $.02 per 1k tokens and using it via the command line llm[1] tool, though. That is a far better deal.

[1] https://github.com/simonw/llm

Post reply on HN