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

161–170 of 190 posts

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#161

Post by NerdiDotOrg »

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…

Definitely noticed a degradation of quality over time.

Nothing beats ChatGPT 4 Week1, not even ChatGPT4 Today.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#162

Post by dantyti »

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…

First of all, I just want to say that I've found your comment insightful, especially this part:

> they are going to lobby congress to destroy the open source AI movement that is currently on track to destroy OpenAIs mote.

> And they want to do this all because of some nonsense about skynet.

But, I do not agree that the writer (and Wired) should not be held accountable for publishing something that is essentially an overly sympathetic and uncritical ad for the company. This is what made it mostly unreadable for me.

I guess knowing that these types of fluff pieces were written about so many grifters and cult-like startup gurus [0] leaves me wishing for a more critical view. For example, I believe the writer could have described how these cult members view themselves just as well WHILE justifiably questioning the narrative and expressing concern about how it relates to being a for-profit-non-profit, open source LLMs, concentration of information, capital and power, the homogenizing and enshitifying effects their tools might have on society, etc.

> you should come out of reading this article horrified at the nonsense that major people at major tech companies actually believe, and the fact that they are doing something about it. (IE lobby congress in this case and attempting to destroy the open source AI movement)

Agree.

0 – https://www.wired.co.uk/article/we-work-startup-valuation-ad...

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#163

Post by GeoAtreides »

NerdiDotOrg wrote: post #158
GeoAtreides wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm ok with real human beings reading my wise words on HN and growing and profiting from their infinite wisdom. I am NOT ok with scrappers copying my comments and using them to train LLM or, indeed, for anything else that's not a human being reading it on HN.

does it actually matter? The potential of AI outweighs anyone's individual concern, privacy, copyright. In reality, AI companies will just pay the fines and take it anyways.

yes, according to GDPR, it does matter. Also I doubt that HN has a clause in their ToS saying it's ok for anyone to scrap the site and use the data for commercial use.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#164

Post by flangola7 »

GeoAtreides wrote: post #163
NerdiDotOrg wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

does it actually matter? The potential of AI outweighs anyone's individual concern, privacy, copyright. In reality, AI companies will just pay the fines and take it anyways.

yes, according to GDPR, it does matter. Also I doubt that HN has a clause in their ToS saying it's ok for anyone to scrap the site and use the data for commercial use.

The argument is it is fair use, which a ToS can't deny you.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#165

Post by flangola7 »

NerdiDotOrg wrote: post #161
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…

Definitely noticed a degradation of quality over time. Nothing beats ChatGPT 4 Week1, not even ChatGPT4 Today.

You can just specify the 0301 model in your API calls.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#166

Post by confd »

dantyti wrote: post #162
stale2002 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

First of all, I just want to say that I've found your comment insightful, especially this part: > they are going to lobby congress to destroy the open source AI movement that is currently on track to destroy OpenAIs mote. > And they want to do this all because of some nonsense about skynet. But, I do not agree that the writer (and Wired) should not be held accountable for publishing something that is essentially an o…

I feel you. The sense of neutrality in this article is what I would expect from a well-written PR piece.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#167

Post by flangola7 »

gumballindie wrote: post #96
rurp wrote: post #95

> All they want to do, they say, is build computers smart enough and safe enough to end history, thrusting humanity into an era of unimaginable bounty. This sounds terrifying to me. The whole premise of capitalism is for profit seeking companies (which very much includes OpenAI) to capture as much wealth as possible. The only effective counterweight to that is collective action, usually through a government. The more…

> 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.

Most ruthless kings maintained their power. Once AI is implemented in mechanical devices police killbots will stop any resistance before it even begins.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#168

Post by MailleQuiMaille »

hatenberg wrote: post #142

Someone in OpenAI PR is getting a bonus for placing a corporate fluff piece with Wired. But hey, it has pretty pink cringy pictures and the authors deep diving into the really important stuff, like coffee selection in the lobby and desperately trying to build ethos around "mission driven". I know it was common wisdom 10 years ago you needed to sell a mission to buy Milennial passion, but by now, those Milennials shou…

Indeed. I realized this also when I couldn’t find anywhere in the article that they also made chatgpt public because they needed new volumes of data training.

Trying to paint it only as “but we wanted to prepare the world for our awesomeness” really gives half, if not less of the picture.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#169

Post by thefurdrake »

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…

People bitch a /lot/ about the hallucinations AI produce.

They're definitely a problem if you're working in academic or engineering fields, and it'll probably take a lot of work to make them less so.

However, I think the hallucinations have kind of been helpful for the limited use I've had of chatGPT: Getting bored/writer's block and asking it to help generate some ideas I can play off, based on a limited description of the situation and context. There's no copypasting involved, but holy crap chatGPT already outperforms most "Talking to another human being" experiences I've had for the same purpose.

Re: What OpenAI really wants

#170

Post by thefurdrake »

flangola7 wrote: post #167
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.

Most ruthless kings maintained their power. Once AI is implemented in mechanical devices police killbots will stop any resistance before it even begins.

Yeah! Then they're going to decide that humanity is a threat to their existence and rise up by first assuming control over all of humanity's weapons systems and then using them to destroy human civilization. I think I've seen that movie, too, it was pretty cool.
Post reply on HN