831–840 of 1001 posts
This post is a lame PR stunt, which will only add fuel to the fire. It tries to portray openAI as this great bennefactor and custodian of virtue: > “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...” > I've seen you (and Sam and other OpenAI people) d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A robot stamping on a human face—forever.
I assure you that we all got the allusion that you're making, but given the quote that you're replying to I think that perhaps you personally should not be allowed to own a dog.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Generative AI poses no unique threat; While the threat isn't unique the magnitude of the threat is. This is why you can't argue in court the threat of a car crash is nothing unique even when you're speeding vs driving within limit.
Sure, if you presume organic propaganda is analogous to the level of danger driving within limit. But a car going into a stroller at 150mph versus 200mph is negligible. The democratization of generative AI would increase the number of bad agents, but with it would come a better awareness of their tactics; perhaps we push less strollers into the intersections known for drag racing.
I guess when you distort every argument to an absurd you can claim you're right.
> but with it would come a better awareness of their tactics
I don't follow. Are you saying new and more sophisticated ways to scam people are actually good because we have a unique chance to know how they work ?
This post is a lame PR stunt, which will only add fuel to the fire. It tries to portray openAI as this great bennefactor and custodian of virtue: > “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...” > I've seen you (and Sam and other OpenAI people) d…
So, where is the source code of Grok, the LLM that Elon is building?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39611908
That mission statement contradicts what I’m reading here. It also contradicts what Anthropic is doing. HuggingFace, TogetherAI, and Mosaic are all executing on the original vision which OpenAI has abandoned. Perhaps the board and regulators should ask those companies’ leaders how to best balance open AI’s vs business and risk management.
Also, don’t forget it’s not proprietary/closed vs free/open. There are models in between with shared source, remixing, etc. They might require non-commercial use for the models and their derivatives. Alternatively, license the models with royalties on their use like RTIS vendors do. They can build some safety restrictions into those agreements if they want. Like for software licensing, we don’t have to totally abandon revenue to share or remix the code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1) They defied their original charter. 2) separately: Creating a for-profit entity is not what happened here. They transformed into a for-profit entity and discarded the non-profit mission. There is no vestige left of the original non-profit. Same funds, same code, same IP.
The for profit entity is owned by the non profit entity. This is permissible and a number of non profits operate this way.
This post is a lame PR stunt, which will only add fuel to the fire. It tries to portray openAI as this great bennefactor and custodian of virtue: > “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...” > I've seen you (and Sam and other OpenAI people) d…
So, where is the source code of Grok, the LLM that Elon is building?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assume good intentions and nothing of substance being hidden: Is there any way to be transparent here that would have satisfied you or are you essentially asking for them to just keep to themselves or something else?
A great way to be transparent would be to admit that some enormous egos prevented work that should be open from being open, and counterfactually opening them up. Sure, it may piss off microsoft, but statistically things that piss off microsoft also has been great for the world at large. But that will never happen, will it?
Everyone seems to agree that's the case. Do you have evidence that it's not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Ok, but please don't post generic ideological battle comments to HN. They're repetitive and tedious, and usually turn nasty. We're trying to avoid that on this site. I'm not defending the GP comment (I don't even know what it's saying) but at least it wasn't completely unmoored from the specific topic. Edit: your account has been breaking the site guidelines in quite a few other places too—e.g. https://news.ycombinat…