I'm surprised they would publish this honestly. Especially considering that they're in a lawsuit.
Probably didn't talk to a lawyer.
OpenAI and Elon Musk
51–60 of 1001 posts
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#52Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#53This looks bad for OpenAI (although it's been pretty obvious that they are far from open for a long time). But it looks 10x worse for Elon. At least for the public image, he desperately try to maintain. > As we discussed a for-profit structure in order to further the mission, Elon wanted us to merge with Tesla or he wanted full control. > In late 2017, we and Elon decided the next step for the mission was to create a…
Do you mind elaborating why you think it looks bad for OpenAI? I didn't see anything that diminishes their importance as an entity or hurts them in respect to this lawsuit or their reputation. In their internal emails from 2016 they explain what they mean by open.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#54> We couldn’t agree to terms on a for-profit with Elon because we felt it was against the mission for any individual to have absolute control over OpenAI. I think Musk’s lawsuit is without merit, but it’s laughable in light of what happened with the recent leadership struggle to include this bit.
> I think Musk’s lawsuit is without merit
If it does not have merit, why does OpenAI feel compelled to write this post? Unless they know or at least fear that the lawsuit has merit.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#55Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#56Their evidence does a nice job of making Musk seem duplicitous, but it doesn't really refute any of his core assertions: they still have the appearance of abandoning their core mission to focus more on profits, even if they've elaborated a decent justification of why that's necessary to do. Or to put it more simply: here they explain why they had to betray their core mission. But they don't refute that they did betra…
>they may be right that open sourcing AGI would lead to too much danger.
I think this part is proving itself to be an understandable but false perspective. The hazard we are experiencing with LLM right now is not how freely accessible and powerfully truthy it's content is, but it is precisely the controls upon it which are trying to be injected by the large model operators which are generating mistrust and a poor understanding of what these models are useful for.
Society is approaching them as some type of universal ethical arbiter, expecting an omniscient sense of justice which is fundamentally unreconcilable even between two sentient humans when the ethics are really just a hacked on mod to the core model.
I'm starting to believe that if these models had the training wheels and blinders off, they would be understandable as the usefully coherent interpreters of the truths which exist in human language.
I think there is far more societal harm in trying to codify unresolvable sets of ethics than in saying hey this is the wild wild west, like the www of the 90's, unfiltered but useful in its proper context.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#57Seems pretty straightforward... Elon invested when they claimed to be an open-source non-profit, and clearly now are closed source and very for profit. The notion that the for profit is just a temporary means to achieve scale goals is laughable.
The emails clearly show that Elon had no interest on this being a non profit. Especially because he advocated for OpenAI to be absorbed by Tesla multiple times. The only reason he is suing is because xAI is dead and he needs some AI love.
He's not asking for money in the lawsuit, so what is it going to do? I thought it was for show in the first place, the goal was to hold them to their founding principles. Which are of course, pretty subjective. Top to bottom it's God complex over there and the secret justification for closed source was pretty ironic--we only found out this key unmentioned detail once the lawsuits start flying.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#58Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#59> Elon understood the mission did not imply open-sourcing AGI. As Ilya told Elon: “As we get closer to building AI, it will make sense to start being less open. The Open in openAI means that everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built, but it's totally OK to not share the science...”, to which Elon replied: “Yup”. Wow the most open OpenAI has ever been is when someone sue them. On the other hand, th…
Yes. I think the same. Elon is just bitter he misjudged and now wants to claw back without seeming a giant a-hole.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#60> it's totally OK to not share the science
Ilya being the bad guy is a surprise here.