291–300 of 596 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And in exchange for those rights, OpenAI has certain rights to compute credits. Microsoft doesn't get to break contract and keep what they got out of the deal while ceasing to supply what provided as part of the deal. That's called theft.
Sure, you'll prove that out in a court over this week?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem, though, is without the huge commercial and societal success of ChatGPT, the AI Safety camp had no real leverage over the direction of AI advancement worldwide. I mean, there are tons of think tanks, advocacy organizations, etc. that write lots of AI safety papers that nobody reads. I'm kind of piqued at the OpenAI board not because I think they had the wrong intentions, but because they failed to see tha…
I agree. I think a significantly better approach would have been to vote for the elaboration of a "checks and balances" structure to OpenAI as it grew in capabilities and influence. Internal to the entire OpenAI org, sounds like all we had was just the for-profit arm board of directors. Externally, you can add investors and public opinion (basically defaults to siding with the for-profit arm). I wish they worked towa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Ego I can absolutely empathize with Ilya here, though. As far as I know the tech making openai function is largely his life’s work. It would be extremely frustrating to have Sam be the face of it, and be given the credit for it. Sam is clearly a very accomplished businessman and networker. Those people are super important, I wish I had a person like him on my team. I’ve had the experience of other people tacitly tak…
Ideas are like children. You don't just need to give birth to them; you also need to raise them, teach them, challenge them, and show them the world. Giving birth to an idea is a necessary condition and sets the boundaries for so much of what it can achieve. But if you're unable to raise it to become a world champion, it isn't worth anything. I've been on the raising ideas side way more in my 20+ career in tech. I kn…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Currently, it’s very unclear who operates under what motives. How much is it about ego? How much is it about money and how much is it due to intellectual positions? Maybe there’re are no heroes and maybe there’re no antiheroes? With the recent news about other investments and deals, the facade doesn’t seem to even resemble the OpenAI’s reality. I can’t wait to read the autobiography of involved parties.
>Ego I can absolutely empathize with Ilya here, though. As far as I know the tech making openai function is largely his life’s work. It would be extremely frustrating to have Sam be the face of it, and be given the credit for it. Sam is clearly a very accomplished businessman and networker. Those people are super important, I wish I had a person like him on my team. I’ve had the experience of other people tacitly tak…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone keeps saying that Microsoft made a huge mistake by not having board representation, and I couldn't disagree more. Microsoft's relationship with OpenAI was really ideal from a speed-of-advancement perspective. That is, reams and reams have been written about how Google has to move at such a slow pace with AI productization because, essentially, they have so much to lose. Microsoft saw this first hand with the…
Exactly this. This incident has proven MSFT’s strong hands without a board seat and they don’t really need it if things do/did go off the rails.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That wasn’t sufficient for Bing, Cortana, or Windows Mobile/Windows Phone.
It wasn't sufficient for Google+ or Farmville either, but both Google and Meta have extremely competitive LLMs. If Microsoft commit themselves (which is a big if ), they could have a competitive AI research lab. They're a cloud company now though, so it makes sense that they'd align themselves with the most service-oriented business of the lot.
No they don’t. Both Bard and Llama are far behind GPT-4, and GPT-4 finished training in August 2022.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They can replicate the tech internally without any doubt and without OpenAI. Would they be also able to keep up with development?
Would a 2.75 trillion dollar software company that has been around since the inception of the modern computer be able to keep up? Probably. If the people running it and the shareholders were committed to keeping up and spending money to do so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wasn't sufficient for Google+ or Farmville either, but both Google and Meta have extremely competitive LLMs. If Microsoft commit themselves (which is a big if ), they could have a competitive AI research lab. They're a cloud company now though, so it makes sense that they'd align themselves with the most service-oriented business of the lot.
both Google and Meta have extremely competitive LLMs No they don’t. Both Bard and Llama are far behind GPT-4, and GPT-4 finished training in August 2022.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does that mean that the move of the board was actually good for openness of AI ?
Is AI/AGI safety the same as openness?
this is the future that orwell feared.