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

251–260 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#251

Post by rrr_oh_man »

danenania wrote: post #174
bugglebeetle wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no way to reconcile their founding statements and principles with what they’re doing now. They don’t even publish legitimate research papers any longer and barely even try to defend themselves as aligning with their prior mission.

I think in their minds, their mission has always been to make AI widely available. It seems like they initially thought open source and open research were a viable path to achieving that mission, but later they changed their minds. I get why people are upset about that pivot, but considering they single-handedly brought AI out of the research lab and into the mainstream, it seems hard to argue that they were wrong. I…

> I think in their minds,

I've found it good practice to judge people by their actions, not their assumend intentions.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#252

Post by mvelbaum »

enriquec wrote: post #208
ajisiekskaiek wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#253

Post by asadotzler »

danans wrote: post #227
rrr_oh_man wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you trust a for profit corporation with the codification?

Call me a capitalist, but I trust several of them competing with each other under the enforcement of laws that impose consequences on them if they produce and distribute content that violates said laws.

so regulation then?

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#254

Post by kortilla »

lovich wrote: post #242
enriquec wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I remember when my family collectively came together to cook a meal when I was a child, how this deprived me of the experience of learning to bootstrap civilization on my own. Literally any time two people work together that’s dangerously close to collectivism as it’s not individuals working in their own. Down with the collectivists, every person should be an independent operator

Collectivism involves deciding for others. If it’s fully voluntary it’s individualism.

Working together is not collectivism.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#257

Post by Jensson »

Zambyte wrote: post #233
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're probably right that building AGI will require a ton of computational power, and that it will be very expensive. Why? This makes it seem like computers are way less efficient than humans. Maybe I'm naive on the matter, but I think it's possible for computers to match or surpass human efficiency.

Computers are still way less efficient than humans, a human brain has less power draw than a laptop and do some immense calculations to parse vision, hearing etc better than any known algorithm constantly.

And the part of the human brain that governs our human intelligence and not just what animals do is much larger than, so unless we figure out a better algorithm than evolution did for intelligence it will require a massive amount of compute.

The brain isn't fast, but it is ridiculously parallel with every cell being its own core so total throughput is immense.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#258

Post by FeepingCreature »

trimethylpurine wrote: post #218
ajisiekskaiek wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think the contrast is that strict behavior norms in the West are not governed behavior norms in the East. One arises analogous with natural selection (previous commenter's take). The other through governance. Arguably, the prior resulted in a rebuilding of government with liberty at its foundation (I like this result). That foundation then being, over centuries, again destroyed by governance. In that view, we might…

It sounds like you're just describing why our watch-and-see approach cannot handle a hard AGI/ASI takeoff. A system that first exhibits some questionable danger, then achieves complete victory a few days later, simply cannot be managed by an incremental approach. We pretty much have to pray that we get a few dangerous-but-not-too-dangerous "practice takeoffs" first, and if anything those will probably just make us think that we can handle it.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#259

Post by Judgmentality »

boringuser2 wrote: post #192
bbor wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the Manhattan project springs to mind. They truly thought they were laboring for the public good, and even if the government let them wouldn’t have wanted to publish their progress. Personally I find the comparison of this whole saga (deepmind -> google —> openai —> anthropic —-> mistral —-> ?) to the Manhattan project very enlightening, both of this project and our society. Instead of a centralized government…

They literally created weapons of mass destruction. Do you think they thought they were good guys because you watched a Hollywood movie?

If you really think you're fighting evil in a war for global domination, it's easy to justify to yourself that it's important you have the weapons before they do. Even if you don't think you're fighting evil; you'd still want to develop the weapons before your enemies so it won't be used against you and threaten your way of life.

I'm not taking a stance here, but it's easy to see why many Americans believed developing the atomic bomb was a net positive at least for Americans, and depending on how you interpret it even the world.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#260

Post by kortilla »

bbor wrote: post #136
andsoitis wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built, but it's totally OK to not share the science... everyone... except scientists and the scientific community.

Well, the Manhattan project springs to mind. They truly thought they were laboring for the public good, and even if the government let them wouldn’t have wanted to publish their progress. Personally I find the comparison of this whole saga (deepmind -> google —> openai —> anthropic —-> mistral —-> ?) to the Manhattan project very enlightening, both of this project and our society. Instead of a centralized government…

The comparison is dumb. It wasn’t called the “open atomic bomb project”
Post reply on HN