Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI and Elon Musk

openai.com

451–460 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#451
post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The benefit is the science, nothing else matters, and having OpenAI decide what matters for everyone is repugnant. Of course they can give us nothing, but in that case they should start paying taxes and stop claiming they're a public benefit org. My prediction is they'll produce little of value going forward. They're too distracted by their wet dreams about all the cash they're going to make to focus on the job at ha…

> The benefit is the science, nothing else matters Even if that science helps not so friendly countries like Russia?

Governments WILL use this. There really isn't any real way to keep their hands off technology like this. Same with big corporations.

It's the regular people that will be left out.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#452
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.

Damage you can do:

- propaganda and fake news

- deep fakes

- slander

- porn (revenge and child)

- spam

- scams

- intelectual property theft

The list goes on.

And for quite a few of those use cases I'd want some guard rails even for a fully on-premise model.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#453
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…

> but it's totally OK to not share the science...

That passes for an explanation to you ? What exactly is the difference between openai and any company with a product then ? Hey, we made THIS and in order to make sure everyone can benefit we sell at a price of X.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Ypu onoy have collegues like that? Sounds quite toxic.

You have colleagues that would continue to work if they no longer got paid?

Rats jump ship in an individualistic system, in a collectivist system you expect the rats to sacrifice themselves to save the whole. Managers often tries to sell you on the collective so you work harder and demand less pay, but that is just him as an individual trying to get more out of you that doesn't mean it actually works like a collective.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#455
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, but it's totally OK to not share the science... Based on this line of reasoning, ANY company that builds any given technology and intends to share (sell) it to the world, but not divulge how it was done, can call itself OpenWhatever. They are clearly saying that the word “Open” in their name means nothing.

AI/AGI is a multiplier. There could have been a world where just Google builds that multipler and only uses it internally. Making that multiplier publicly available can be the "Open" part.

I understand that this particular audience is very sensitive about the term, but why are we being so childish about it? Yes, you can name your company whatever you want within reason. Yes, it does not have to mean anything in particular, asterisk. Companies being named in colourful ways is not particularly new, nor interesting.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

E-mail has *not* been killed long ago (aside some issues trying to run your own server and not getting blocked by gmail/hotmail). It is under threat now, due to the increased sophistication of spam.

Email might already be 'culturally dead' though. I guess my nephew might have an email address for the occasional password recovery, but the idea of actually communicating over email with other humans might be completely alien to him ;) Similar in my current job btw.

Ok, I get how one might use a variety of other tools for informal communication, I don't really use e-mail for that any more either, but I'm curious, what else can you possibly use for work ? With the requirement that it must be easy to back up and transfer (for yourself as well as the organization), so any platforms are immediately out of question.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So you still believe the open internet has any chance of surviving what is coming? I admire your optimism. Reliable information and communication will soon be opt-in only. The "open internet" will become an eclectic collection of random experiences, where any real human output will be a pleasant, rare surprise, that stirs the pot for a short blip before it is assimilated and buried under the flood.

Some parts yes, some parts no. communication as we know it will effectively cease to exist, as we have to either require strong enough verification to kill off anonymity, or somehow provide very strong, very adaptive spam filters. Or manual moderation in terms of some anti-bot vetting. Depends on demand for such "no bot" content.

Search may be reduced to nigh uselessness, but the saavy will still be able to share quality information as needed. AI may even assist in that with people who have the domain knowledge to properly correct the prompts and rigorously proofread. How we find that quality information may, once again, be through closed off channels.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#458
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…

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.

Thanks Meta for releasing llama. One of the most questionable releases in the past years. Yes, I know, its fun to play with LocalLLM, and maybe reason enought o downvote this to hell. But there is also the other side, that free models like this enabled text pollution, which we now have. Did I already say "Thanks Meta"?

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#459

This looks bad for OpenAI (although it's been pretty obvious that they are far from open for a long time). But it looks 10x worse for Elon. At least for the public image, he desperately try to maintain. > As we discussed a for-profit structure in order to further the mission, Elon wanted us to merge with Tesla or he wanted full control. > In late 2017, we and Elon decided the next step for the mission was to create a…

There's nothing new here, though. That he demanded control of OpenAI has been well reported in the past.

It's not just that Elon wanted control, it's that Elon wanted it to become closed and for-profit. This exposes Elon as a bald-faced hypocrite with cynical intentions motivating the lawsuit.

Sam's reticence to publicly defend himself until now has backfired. Elon has fully controlled the public narrative and perception forming and it is hard to dislodge perceptions after they've settled.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is OpenAI had a reputation to protect, Musk can't sink any lower at this point, and his stans will persist. The fact that they slinging mud at each other just proves the mutual criticism though, and provides an edifying spectacle for the rest of us.

> Musk can't sink any lower at this point, and his stans will persist. You sure about that ? For now they are largely looking away (and boy it's hard !) from his 'far right' adventures. But it was just reported that he met with Trump. And it's pretty clear that if Trump is elected and does cancel EV subsides as he says he will do, Tesla is dead and he knows it. So now, we have both of those guys, having something eac…

Just a word of advice regarding the effect of associating with Trump: don’t make the mistake of thinking everyone holds the same opinion as you
Post reply on HN