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

OpenAI and Elon Musk

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#81

Post by Jensson »

uncomputation wrote: post #70
Reubend wrote: post #13

Their 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 don't refute that they did betray it They do. They say: > 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...” Whether you agree with this is a different matter but…

What they said there isn't their mission, that is their hidden agenda. Here is their real mission that they launched with, they completely betrayed this:

> As a non-profit, our aim is to build value for everyone rather than shareholders. Researchers will be strongly encouraged to publish their work, whether as papers, blog posts, or code, and our patents (if any) will be shared with the world

https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#82

Post by greenie_beans »

magnio wrote: post #6

> 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…

really makes the "Open" sound more sinister, like they're opening the ai.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#83

Post by BoiledCabbage »

Reubend wrote: post #13

Their 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…

> ... and returning the donations they took from these wealthy tech founders, they used the benevolent appearance of their non-profit status and their name to mislead everyone about their intentions.

I can't tell if your comment is intentionally misleading or just entirely missing the point. The entire post states that Elon musk was well aware and onboard with their intentions. Tried to take over OpenAI and roll it into his private company to control. And finally agreed specifically that they need to continue to become less open over time.

And your post is to play Elon out to be a victim who didn't realize any of this? He's replying to emails saying he's agreeing. It's hard to understand why you posted something so contradictory above pretending he wasn't.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#84

Post by threeseed »

xcv123 wrote: post #64
threeseed wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Musk wants to take the high moral ground and lecture others about openness and the importance to humanity he should start with his own actions. It seems pretty clear that altruism is a cynical marketing and PR technique for him rather than something he actually cares about.

Musk cofounded and funded OpenAI.

And then pushed them to create a for-profit entity and merge with Tesla.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#85

Post by archagon »

romanovcode wrote: post #78
archagon wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[dead]

Trust me, the moment they do discover anything it will first be under the control of CIA, not the nerds who invented it.

The nerds are getting richer and more powerful by the year. We aren't that far from a dystopian cyberpunk future where corporations take the place of governments.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#86

Post by BoiledCabbage »

magnio wrote: post #6

> 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…

> this shows Elon doesn't care jackshit about the lack of openness from OpenAI. He's just mad only that he walked away from a monumental success.

Yup he's pretty transparently lying here.

He committed to fund for $1B dollars. Then when they wouldn't make him CEO and/or roll the company into Tesla he refused his commitment after paying out only 4% of it. Claimed the company would fail and only he could save them (again wrong).

And now is mad he doesn't control the top AI out there and because he chose to walk away from them.

And yet again people are falling for him. Elon talk never matches his action. And there is still a large portion of the internet that falls for his talk time and time again.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#87

Post by sroussey »

> Elon wanted majority equity, initial board control, and to be CEO. In the middle of these discussions, he withheld funding. Reid Hoffman bridged the gap to cover salaries and operations.

Wow, Reid Hoffman for the win.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#88

Post by EMIRELADERO »

chjj wrote: post #72

I find it very strange that OpenAI would post this in the middle of a lawsuit. Shouldn't all of these emails come out in discovery anyway? Publishing this only benefits OpenAI if they're betting on the case never reaching discovery. It seems like they just want to publish very select emails which paint a certain picture. Also, DKIM signatures are notably absent, not that we could verify them anyway since the emails a…

> Also, DKIM signatures are notably absent, not that we could verify them anyway since the emails are heavily redacted.

What are you implying? Faking emails opens you up to libel. I doubt OpenAI is trying to add another lawsuit to their workload.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#89

Post by repler »

devsda wrote: post #77
magnio wrote: post #6

> 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…

> The Open in openAI means that everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built.(even though sharing everything is definitely the right strategy in the short and possibly medium term for recruitment purposes). "OpenSource". Open in open source means everyone should benefit from the fruits of source after it is built but it's totally OK to not share the source(Even though calling ourselves open is the ri…

isn’t this the old: free as in speech, not as in beer

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#90

Post by chjj »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #88
chjj wrote: post #72

I find it very strange that OpenAI would post this in the middle of a lawsuit. Shouldn't all of these emails come out in discovery anyway? Publishing this only benefits OpenAI if they're betting on the case never reaching discovery. It seems like they just want to publish very select emails which paint a certain picture. Also, DKIM signatures are notably absent, not that we could verify them anyway since the emails a…

> Also, DKIM signatures are notably absent, not that we could verify them anyway since the emails are heavily redacted. What are you implying? Faking emails opens you up to libel. I doubt OpenAI is trying to add another lawsuit to their workload.

> What are you implying?

I'm not implying anything. I'm pointing out a lack of openness on OpenAI's part.

Post reply on HN