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

711–720 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#711

Post by zigman1 »

SpaceManNabs wrote: post #672
sangnoir wrote: post #273

> we felt it was against the mission for any individual to have absolute control over OpenAI This has to be a joke, right? I'd like to think Altman paused for a second and chuckled to himself after writing - or reading - that.

This whole post makes OpenAI look like a clown show.

Which it is, but somehow is receiving 1/10th of the flack from HN community than any non-tech bureaucratic organization would, especially a sovereign entity that dares to charge taxes. Maybe that's because it is led by cool "startup" people, I don't know.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#712

Post by Davidzheng »

sigmoid10 wrote: post #313
Jensson wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he disagrees with 4: 4. Language prediction training will not get stuck in a local optimum. Most previous things we train on could have been better served if the model developed AGI, but they didn't. There is no reason to expect LLMs to not get stuck in a local optimum as well, and I have seen no good argument as to why they wouldn't get stuck like everything else we tried.

There is very little in terms of rigorous mathematics on the theoretical side of this. All we have are empirics, but everything we have seen so far points to the fact that more compute equals more capabilities. That's what they are referring to in the blog post. This is particularly true for the current generation of models, but if you look at the whole history of modern computing, the law roughly holds up over the l…

True but also from general theory you should expect any function approximator to exhibit intelligence when exposed to enough data points from humans, the only question is the speed of convergence. In that sense we do have a guarantee that it will reach human ability

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#713

Post by NeutralCrane »

hef19898 wrote: post #658
mlrtime wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've said "reasonably well" a couple times here.... I think there can be book written between the gap of "reasonably well" and "prosperous". And these things are all relative of course... if "reasonably well" is the best in the world at the time, then great. But when you have another system to compare to at the same time, "reasonably well" falls apart very quickly. I'm not sure if you lived in a Soviet country duri…

It is not to glorify the Soviet system. Looking back so, from the end of the Stalin era to, say, the mid-70s, the USSR did compete rather well so: - military and space tech was mostly on par (a bunch conflicts, incl. Vietnam, show that) - economically, the USSR was stable - people were not starving Of course, the was less luxury and consumerism, but that was true for a lot of other countries as well in Western Europe…

Stalinism lasted until at least his death in 1953. So the period you are describing is all of 20 years, which is essentially a blip on the scale of nations. That same period was also marked by a widespread economic golden age by most of the victors of WWII (France, UK, Japan) and several of the losers (Japan, West Germany), which also ended around the mid-70s, just not as harshly. That’s also around the time communist China started abandoning communist economies for state capitalist ones and started its ascendancy.

So the question is, was communism actually working well in that period, or was it more or less an unsustainable fluke due to the post-war boom era, and as soon as that ended it got left in the dust?

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#714

Post by sva_ »

iteygib wrote: post #680

This is the usual Musk play book. He is a salesman, not a tech guru, and plays the "good guy card" when it suits him in order to fool his followers en masse. A few months ago this forum was very much for the profit model of Altman after his ouster, and now it's the other way around. Why believe any sort of discussion on the internet at all anymore? Can hackernews prove the discussions here are not by Tesla staff? By…

> A few months ago this forum was very much for the profit model of Altman after his ouster

I did not get that impression at all.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#716

Post by habosa »

Regardless of who is right here, I think the enormous egos at play make OpenAI the last company I’d want to develop AGI. First Sam vs. the board, now Elon vs. everyone … it’s pretty clear this company is not in any way being run for the greater good. It’s all ego and money with some good science trapped underneath.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#717

Post by oglop »

iteygib wrote: post #680

This is the usual Musk play book. He is a salesman, not a tech guru, and plays the "good guy card" when it suits him in order to fool his followers en masse. A few months ago this forum was very much for the profit model of Altman after his ouster, and now it's the other way around. Why believe any sort of discussion on the internet at all anymore? Can hackernews prove the discussions here are not by Tesla staff? By…

I noticed the same thing. I also notice pompous dorks love to hate on people like you who point this out.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#718

Post by reducesuffering »

john2x wrote: post #383
reducesuffering wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that surprises you, you haven't followed Ilya much. Ilya is very terrified of AGI destroying humanity and doesn't believe in this "accelerate AI and give it to everyone" naivety. '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…

Is that talk mentioned in the quote available online?

No I don’t believe it was publicly recorded.

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#719

Post by Davidzheng »

ActorNightly wrote: post #471
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 building AGI will require a ton of computational power, and that it will be very expensive Eh. Humans have about 1.5 * 10 ^ 14 synapses (i.e connections between neurons). Assume all the synapses are firing (highly unlikely to be the case in reality), and the average firing speed is 0.05ms (there are chemical synapses that are much slower, but we take the fastest speed of the electrical sy…

LLMs are just training on massive amounts of data in order to find the right software. No human can program these machines to do the complicated tasks that humans can do. Rather we search for them with Gradient based methods using data

Re: OpenAI and Elon Musk

#720

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…

Reid Hoffman gave $10 million through his private foundation, Aphorism Foundation, in 2017 and 2018:

https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/464347021_201712_990P...

https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/464347021_201812_990P...

Since private foundations aren't public charities, they don't have the pass-through protection of donor-advised funds, so this should have been excluded from the public support total because it is more than 2% of the total support.

Also, this reporter did some additional legwork earlier in 2023: https://techcrunch.com/2023/05/17/elon-musk-used-to-say-he-p...

Post reply on HN