371–380 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Collectivism involves deciding for others. If it’s fully voluntary it’s individualism. Working together is not collectivism.
So everyone in OpenAI or google decides for themselves what they want to work on and is detached from hierarchies?
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…
In a way this could be more closed than for profit.
> even though sharing everything is definitely the right strategy in the short and possibly medium term for recruitment purposes
Now we have the clear proof that it was their clear intention from the start to abuse from the naivety of everyone pretending to have an open sourcing goal when in fact they knew planned from the beginning to close everything once they would reach a certain amount of success.
That sucks...
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…
The biggest real problem I’m experiencing right now isn’t controls on the AI, it’s weird spam emails that bypass spam filters because they look real enough, but are just cold email marketing bullshit: https://x.com/tlalexander/status/1765122572067434857 These systems are making the internet a worse place to be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
What has failed are completely "collectivist" or "individualist" societies. Societies that balance the two (like the post WWII US) are the ones that have advanced their standard of living the most.
The US saw the most spectacular rise in the standard of living from 1800 up to WW2 the world had ever seen. This was all due to the free market, not collectivism.
During WW2, the US supplied its allies England and the USSR, and also fought across both oceans and buried the opposition, a truly spectacular feat. Again, through the free market.
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…
Everytime they say LLMs are the path to AGI, I cringe a little.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Collectivism involves deciding for others. If it’s fully voluntary it’s individualism. Working together is not collectivism.
> Collectivism involves deciding for others. That may be true, but that's not sufficient to define collectivism. There are many other forms of societal structures where "deciding for others" exists as well. Unless you mean to lump all these together, and say that companies and tyranny for example are the same as collectivism? > If it’s fully voluntary it’s individualism. If I _voluntarily_ decide to join a "collectiv…
An individualist, if you are free to leave it at any time. There's nothing wrong with forming a collective in the US, I think like 20,000 of them have been formed over the last 240 years.
You don't hear about them much because they all failed. You're free to start a collective anytime in the US and try to make it work.
Isn't freedom great?
> it's totally OK to not share the science Ilya being the bad guy is a surprise here.
'Back in May 2023, before Ilya Sutskever started to speak at the event, I sat next to him and told him, “Ilya, I listened to all of your podcast interviews. And unlike Sam Altman, who spread the AI panic all over the place, you sound much more calm, rational, and nuanced. I think you do a really good service to your work, to what you develop, to OpenAI.” He blushed a bit, and said, “Oh, thank you. I appreciate the compliment.”
An hour and a half later, when we finished this talk, I looked at my friend and told her, “I’m taking back every single word that I said to Ilya.”
He freaked the hell out of people there. And we’re talking about AI professionals who work in the biggest AI labs in the Bay area. They were leaving the room, saying, “Holy shit.”
The snapshots above cannot capture the lengthy discussion. The point is that Ilya Sutskever took what you see in the media, the “AGI utopia vs. potential apocalypse” ideology, to the next level. It was traumatizing.'
> For example, Albania is using OpenAI’s tools to accelerate its EU accession by as much as 5.5 years What an insane thing to say so matter of factly. This is like a character in an airport bookstore political thriller who is poorly written to be smart.
Why is that such an insane thing for them to say?