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

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#431

Post by ecmascript »

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…

> On the other hand, 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.

You really come to that conclusion from a "yup"? Damn.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#432

Post by malermeister »

Falimonda wrote: post #406
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh huh. And they arrived at this 5.5 number how? It's bullshit.

You cannot fathom how a government official may have told them that they've managed to accelerate their EU accession through the help of LLMs by a specific number of months? Here's a speculative scenario that doesn't seem so insane: Albania has a roadmap for EU accession. The roadmap is broken up into discrete tasks. The tasks have estimates for time to completion. They've been able to quickly hack away at 5.5 years…

EU accession isn't some jira story where you close tickets.

For a country like Albania, it requires massive social, cultural, political and economical changes. There's no way anyone has a good estimate and there's no way an LLM has magically transformed the culture in a way that's a) meaningful and b) quantifiable.

Turkey has been a candidate for 25 years now, with no meaningful progress.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#433

Post by ben_w »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #262
intended wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Citation needed. Counterpoints: - LLMs were mistrusted well before anything recent. - More controls make LLMs more trustworthy for many people, not less. The Snafu at Goog suggests a need for improved controls, not 0 control…

Counter-counterpoint: absolutely nobody who has unguardrailed Stable Diffusion installed at home for private use has ever asked for more guardrails. I'm just saying. :) Guardrails nowadays don't really focus on dangers (it's hard to see how an image generator could produce dangers!) so much as enforcing public societal norms.

> Counter-counterpoint: absolutely nobody who has unguardrailed Stable Diffusion installed at home for private use has ever asked for more guardrails.

Not so. I have it at home, I make nice wholesome pictures of raccoons and tigers sitting down for Christmas dinner etc., but I also see stories like this and hope they're ineffective: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68440150

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#434

Post by ben_w »

BriggyDwiggs42 wrote: post #308
bergen wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because something is not dangerous to the user doesn’t mean it can’t be dangerous for others when someone is wielding it maliciously

What kind of damage can you do with a current day llm? I’m guessing targeted scams or something? They aren’t even good hackers yet.

The moment they are good hackers, everyone has a trivially cheap hacker. Hard to predict what that would look like, but I suspect it is a world where nobody is employing software developers because a LLM that can hack can probably also write good code.

So, do you want future LLMs to be restricted, or unlimited? And remember, to prevent this outcome you have to predict model capabilities in advance, including "tricks" like prompting them to "think carefully, step by step".

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#435

Post by ben_w »

boredtofears wrote: post #355
BriggyDwiggs42 wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of damage can you do with a current day llm? I’m guessing targeted scams or something? They aren’t even good hackers yet.

Fake revenge porn, nearly undetectable bot creation on social media with realistic profiles (I've already seen this on HN), generated artwork passed off as originals, chatbots that replace real-time human customer service but have none of the agency... I can keep going. All of these are things that have already happened. These all were previously possible of course but now they are trivially scalable.

Most of those examples make sense, but what's this doing on your list?

> chatbots that replace real-time human customer service but have none of the agency

That seems good for society, even though it's bad for people employed in that specific job.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#436

Post by Jensson »

dauertewigkeit wrote: post #411
enriquec wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Millions of people including one side of my family have experienced the opposite. They were tenant farmers living in poverty, barely subsisting, before the hard left socialists both 1. developed the economy enough to give them jobs, 2. provided social safety nets such as tax payer paid healthcare so they wouldn't go bankrupt every time they needed to buy medicine or visit a doctor. If the country had never gone that…

> If the country had never gone that direction it would have spent many more decades being a quasi-feudal land stuck the the middle ages

Capitalism was the end of such arrangements in the most developed parts of the world. Individualism helps since individual investors benefits from investing in better equipment making people more productive and thus helping living standards overall.

Social solutions to the same problem doesn't come close to being as effective at eliminating such inefficiencies. The main thing social solutions can do is provide baselines to the population such as education and healthcare as you say, but without capitalism to follow-up with targeted investments the country will remain poor even if its population is extremely educated. Social solutions are just very bad at using peoples talents well, they have a too collectivist view and don't see the individuals.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#437

Post by GaryNumanVevo »

sharkjacobs wrote: post #297

> 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.

To me, it reeks of "Rationalist-speak". Throw a couple numbers with decimal points to sound precise, mention Bayesian priors a few times.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#438

Post by Jensson »

bergen wrote: post #272
enriquec wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Do you truely believe google, OpenAI or Ford are the product of a single person?

Everyone contributed for the sake of themselves and not for the greater good of the company, that is what individualism is.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#439

Post by rmbyrro »

2pointsomone wrote: post #314

If anyone paying the right price to access a product, and no underlying technology, making it "open", isn't most of the world's technology open? Isn't Apple really OpenApple? Isn't Oracle really OpenOracle? Apple probably puts out more open-source tech than OpenAI. Does the word mean much anymore, then? Is it nothing more than a sentiment then? Perhaps OpenAI should have renamed itself to "AI for all" or something wh…

Well, if AI is the product, Apple is OpenLuxuryHardware, and Oracle is OpenScrewYou.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#440

Post by tsimionescu »

Falimonda wrote: post #406
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh huh. And they arrived at this 5.5 number how? It's bullshit.

You cannot fathom how a government official may have told them that they've managed to accelerate their EU accession through the help of LLMs by a specific number of months? Here's a speculative scenario that doesn't seem so insane: Albania has a roadmap for EU accession. The roadmap is broken up into discrete tasks. The tasks have estimates for time to completion. They've been able to quickly hack away at 5.5 years…

There is no conceivable way in which an estimate of 5.5 years in a non-physical process is anything other than bullshit. If you're estimating paperwork in years, then you're already giving enormously rough estimates. 5 years maybe would have made some sense, but .5 years at that scale is just a way to make a gut feeling sound precise.

Even more importantly, the process of acceeding to the European Union is a political and economic process. The pace at which such things go and the exact requirements are in a constant churn. Today you might need some paperwork, tomorrow some other. You might meet all the technical requirements but not be accepted, or you might not meet all the technical requirements but exceptions can be made, all at the whims of other states' current leaders. Long-term estimates are not even close to plausible for such a process.

Post reply on HN