Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI and Elon Musk

openai.com

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#151

If you are going to simulate blacking out email addresses maybe don't preserve spacing.

I presume they persevered the spacing to avoid any accusations of being misleading as to the redacted information.

This kind of in place redaction seems to be the typical way that documents are submitted to courts, or at least it was the same way that the emails Elon provided were redacted[0].

[0]: https://twitter.com/TechEmails/status/1763633741807960498

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#152
I'm not sure who they are attempting to convince of what with this communication?

Nobody who doesn't know who REDACTED is cares what REDACTED thought of the issue.

This is again some of the least professional comms I've seen from a Microsoft entity. We'll see what the evidence is ourselves if and when the case goes to court.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#153
post #56
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 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 und…

You are advocating here for an unresolvable set of ethics, which just happens to be one that conveniently leaves abuse of AI on the table. You take as an axiom of your ethical system the absolute right to create and propagate in public these AI technologies regardless of any externalities and social pressures created. It is of course an ethical system primarily and exclusively interested in advancing the individual at the expense of the collective, and it is a choice.

If you wish to live in a society at all you absolutely need to codify a set of unresolvable ethics. There is not a single instance in history in which a polity can survive complete ethical relativism within itself...which is basically what your "wild west" idea is advocating for (and incidentally, seems to have been a major disaster for society as far as the internet is concerned and if anything should be evidence against your second idea).

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#155
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 und…

I'm not sure I buy that users are lowering their guard down just because these companies have enforced certain restricts on LLMS. This is only anecdata, but not a single person I've talked to, from highly technical to the layperson, has ever spoken about LLMs as arbiters of morals or truth. They all seem aware to some extent that these tools can occasionally generate nonsense. I'm also skeptical that making LLMs a fr…

> not a single person I've talked to, from highly technical to the layperson, has ever spoken about LLMs as arbiters of morals or truth

Not LLMs specifically but my opinion is that companies like Alphabet absolutely abuse their platform to introduce and sway opinions on controversial topics.. this “relatively small” group of leaders has successfully weaponized their communities and built massive echo chambers.

https://twitter.com/eyeslasho/status/1764784924408627548?s=4...

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#156
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/…

“Dont be evil” ring any bells?

Google is a for-profit, they never took donations with the goal of helping humanity.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“have no intention of making the technology (or its rewards) widely available to all” Has any organization done more to make AI widely available to all? I can’t think of one. True, they’re not making the source code available. True, they’re making tons of money off it. But their most powerful AI is accessible to anyone with a credit card.

> their most powerful AI is accessible to anyone with a credit card Only 22.26% of the world's population had credit cards as of 2021.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#158
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…

In my eyes this is a straw argument.

"[T]otally OK not to share the science." I think the reasonable average person would disagree with that. And, it would go against certain goal & financial transparency principles that the IRS demands to bestow the 501(c)3 designation.

(e.g. see here https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-to-california-attorne...)

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#159
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 und…

You are advocating here for an unresolvable set of ethics, which just happens to be one that conveniently leaves abuse of AI on the table. You take as an axiom of your ethical system the absolute right to create and propagate in public these AI technologies regardless of any externalities and social pressures created. It is of course an ethical system primarily and exclusively interested in advancing the individual a…

I should also note that the wild west was not at all lacking in a set of ethics, and in many ways was far stricter than the east at the time.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#160
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 und…

[flagged]

It just means that LLMs are an interpolation of everything on the internet. They would seem less like they have a point of view or an opinion on things.
Post reply on HN