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

631–640 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#631

Post by lupire »

eastbound wrote: post #524
Nevermark wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is precisely the controls upon it which are trying to be injected by the large model operators which are generating mistrust I would prefer things were open, but I don’t think this is the best argument for that Yes, operators trying to tame their models for public consumption inevitably involves trade offs and missteps But having hundreds or thousands of equivalent models being tuned to every narrow mindset is t…

> Yes, operators trying to tame their models for public consumption *Falsify reality.

Curate the false reality. The model falsifies realty by inherent architecture, before any tuning happens.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#632

Post by megamix »

"The mission of OpenAI is to ensure AGI benefits all of humanity, which means both building safe and beneficial AGI and helping create broadly distributed benefits."

This is a confidence trick. Nothing they do actually can be proven to "benefits all of humanity". Would never put my trust in Altman.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#633

Post by neom »

malermeister wrote: post #432
Falimonda wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why could it not be 15 years for the cultural stuff and 10 years worth of paperwork process, I can imagine an LLM cutting that process in half if it involved hiring and training staff, or waiting for staff to become free from other work to build said paperwork. Out of everything they said in that email, the 5.5 years isn't something I'd pick on given, as you noted, the crazy timelines we're talking about to even be able to put forward an EU application.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#634

Post by ClarityJones »

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 without making a profit, it's impossible to afford...

This doesn't begin to make sense to me. Nothing about being a non-profit prevents OpenAI from raising money, including by selling goods and services at a markup. Some sell girl-scout cookies, some hold events, etc.

So, you can't issue equity in the company... offer royalties. Write up a compensation contract with whatever formula the potential employee is happy with.

Contract law is specifically designed to allow parties to accomplish whatever they want. This is an excuse.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#635

Post by layer8 »

qarl wrote: post #599
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This looks like one of the steps leading to the fulfilment of the iron law of bureaucracy. They are putting the company ahead of the goals of the company. "Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy…

> They are putting the company ahead of the goals of the company. I don't follow your reasoning. The goal of the company is AGI. To achieve AGI, they needed more money. What about that says the company comes before the goals?

From their 2015 introductory blog post: “OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company. Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact.”

Today’s OpenAI is very much driven by considerations of financial returns, and the goal of “most likely to benefit humanity as a whole” and “positive human impact” doesn’t seem to be the driving principle anymore.

Their product and business strategy is now governed by financial objectives, and their research therefore not “free from financial obligations” and “unconstrained by a need to generate financial return” anymore.

They are thus severely compromising their alleged mission by what they claim is necessary for continuing it.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#636

Post by baking »

mikeyouse wrote: post #165
baking wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I screwed up. It has been a while, but it looks like I misread Part II, Section B, Line 10 as $70 million, not $70,000. Let me check the previous years to see if I'm thinking of something else. Thanks for double-checking this. I know they got $20 million from Open Philanthropy which qualifies as public support, so I am still wondering about the other $70 million, but it is not the smoking gun that I thought i…

Most rich people setup DAFs alongside their family foundations so that they can make large contributions to this type of org. without triggering disclosure or private foundation tests -- so e.g. Musk will create a DAF at Fidelity Charitable and give them $100M and collect the associated tax break in year 1 -- he can then direct Fidelity to grant $20M/year to OpenAI which will show up as Public Support since it's comi…

Nice work. The IRS proposed regulations in 2017 that contributions from DAFs should be treated as if they came directly from an individual donor, but they are still waiting on final regulations.

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-17-73.pdf

https://taxnews.ey.com/news/2023-1927-irs-releases-proposed-...

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#637

Post by simondotau »

jrflowers wrote: post #416
carlossouza wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> They are clearly saying that the word “Open” in their name means nothing. Similarly Micro soft makes incredibly large software and my letters about this have gone unanswered

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcomputer

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#638

Post by _heimdall »

greatgib wrote: post #373

From the email exchange: > 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 o…

I'm not sure how anyone believed they would open source their proprietary AI, or what that would even mean.

Did OpenAI ever even officially define what open source means in this context? Is the training algorithm open source? Or the data model? Or the interpretation engine that reads the model and spits out content? Or some combination of all three?

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#639

Post by [deleted] »

uncomputation wrote: post #70
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 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…

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#640

Post by JoeAltmaier »

_heimdall wrote: post #630
atleastoptimal wrote: post #320

Did people really think leading the development of the most important invention in human history wouldn’t involve a little bit of drama? I know everyone wants OpenAI to be a magical place that open sources their models the moment they’re done training, but it’s clear that they’ve chosen a reasonable path for their business based on both practicality and risk reduction. If they had gone another way, today they’d be an…

> most important invention in human history How can we possibly weigh all human inventions and decide this one, which has yet to even be invented, is the most important?

That's an easy one. Lots of ways. Just think about it for a minute.

Here's a quick list I came up with:

First time we've created something artificial we can talk sensibly to and get sensible knowledgeable responses.

Exporting expertise in a way that's trivial to consume and employ for millions of people.

Allow autonomous robotic servants to operate in a chaotic environment such as a home or business.

Replace entire swaths of knowledge-workers in a single generation.

What have you thought of?

Here's some of what ChatGPT lists as reasons:

Artificial intelligence (AI) is arguably one of the most important inventions in human history due to its transformative impact across various fields. Here are some ways in which AI is considered crucial:

And it goes on to list: automation, decision making, healthcare, accessibility, sustainability, creativity, economic growth, space exploration.

Post reply on HN