> Unfortunately, humanity's future is in the hands of XXXX. Only wrong answers please.
OpenAI and Elon Musk
501–510 of 1001 posts
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#502Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
> if Trump is elected and does cancel EV subsides as he says he will do, Tesla is dead You know that Tesla operates outside the US as well, right? Where 95% of the worlds population live?
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#503Earlier 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?
As we saw previously it doesn't matter much if you are top notch ai researcher, if 1-2 millions of your potential personal wealth are in stake this affect decision making (and probably would mine too).
How much of a bribe would it take for anybody inside with good enough access to switch sides and take all the golden eggs out? 100 million? A billion? Trivial amounts compared to what we discuss. And they will race each other to your open arms for such amounts.
We see sometimes recently ie government officials betraying their own countries to russian spies in Europe for few hundred - few thousands of euros. A lot of people are in some way selfish by nature, or can be manipulated easily via emotions. Secret services across the board are experts in that, it just works(tm).
To sum it up - I don't think it can be protected long term.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#504I find it very strange that OpenAI would post this in the middle of a lawsuit. Shouldn't all of these emails come out in discovery anyway? Publishing this only benefits OpenAI if they're betting on the case never reaching discovery. It seems like they just want to publish very select emails which paint a certain picture. Also, DKIM signatures are notably absent, not that we could verify them anyway since the emails a…
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#505I don't trust anyone involved to have the best interest of anyone else involved.
A leak needs to happen to cut through the BS and nonsense.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#506> 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.
OpenDoor?
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#507Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
So.. "open" means "open at first, then not so much or not at all as we get closer to achieving AGI"? As they become more successful, they (obviously) have a lot of motivation to not be "open" at all, and that's without even considering the so-called ethical arguments. More generally, putting "open" in any name frequently ends up as a cheap marketing gimmick. If you end up going nowhere it doesn't matter, and if you'r…
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#508Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah seems pretty cut and dry. It'd feel pretty bad to see OpenAI doing what they're doing now after saying things like "My probability assessment of OpenAI being relevant to DeepMind/Google without a dramatic change in execution and resources is 0%."
He was right though, they did have a dramatic change in execution and resources the next couple of years when they prepared to sell out to Microsoft and that gave them a chance. Elon really gave them good advice there, even if it was snarky.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#509Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. Yup he's pretty transparently lying here. He committed to fund for $1B dollars. Then when they wouldn't make him CEO and/or roll the company into Tesla he refused his commitment after paying out only 4% of it. Claimed the company would fail and only he could save them (agai…
Whether it is Elon or Altman that controls it has nothing to do with how open or not openAI is. And it has become very clear that OpenAI is nothing but Microsoft in a trenchcoat. No matter his motives, I applaud this lawsuit. Who cares if his talk doesn't match his action? His action, here, is good.
Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk
#510Earlier quoted context omitted.
Generative AI will make the world on general a worse place to be. They are not very good at writing truth, but they are very excellent at writing convincing bullshit . It's already difficult to distinguish generated text/image/video from human responses / real footage, its only gonna get more difficult to do so and cheaper to generate. In other words, it's very likely generative AI will be very good at creating fake…
We will have to go back to using trust in the source as the main litmus test for credibility. Text from sources that are known to have humans write (or verify) everything they publish in a reasonably neutral way will be trusted, the rest will be assumed to be bullshit by default. It could be the return of real journalism. There is a lot to rebuild in this respect, as most journalism has gone to the dogs in the last f…