Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 678 posts

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#421

Post by mlyle »

manquer wrote: post #179
ben_w wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is nobody in these very rich guys' spheres pushing back on their thought process? Yes, frequently and loudly. When Altman was collecting the award at Cambridge the other year, protesters dropped in on the after-award public talk/Q&A session, and he actively empathised with the protestors . > So far we are multiple years in with much investment and little return, and no obvious large-scale product-market fit, much l…

> The product market fit is fantastic. This isn't the first time I've heard random strangers discussing it in public. Hardly the evidence of PMF. There is always something new in the zeitgeist, that every one is talking about, some more so than others . 2 years before it was VR, few years before that NFTs and blockchain everything, before that it was self driving cars before that personal voice assistants like Siri a…

> despite how far it has come it cannot in next 30 years be ubiquitous, even if the l5 magic tech exists today in every new car sold it will take 15 years for current cars to lifecycle.

We must have a different meaning of ubiquitous. Ubiquitous means "found everywhere" not "has eliminated everything else."

You don't even need to cycle the fleet once to meet the definition of ubiquitous. If you can get a self driving car in any city and many towns, you see them all over the place, and a third of trips are done with them, that'd be ubiquitous in my book.

I don't see why you couldn't get there in 3 decades. I don't think it's likely in 12 years but it seems possible in that timeframe.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#422

Post by someothherguyy »

agnosticmantis wrote: post #196

From Musk's email: "Frankly, what surprises me is that the AI community is taking this long to figure out concepts. It doesn’t sound super hard. High-level linking of a large number of deep nets sounds like the right approach or at least a key part of the right approach." Genuine question I've always had is, are these charlatans conscious of how full of shit they are, or are they really high on their own stuff? Also…

This is common supposedly in models of grandiose narcissism, which is a subtype that is associated with having leadership traits (agentic extraversion). Not saying anyone has it or that it is necessarily a bad thing, but it might lead you to explore some insights into traits that lead to this type of behavior.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#424

Post by ethbr1 »

wbl wrote: post #373
ben_w wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're writing a spreadsheet in LaTeX, I suspect something has gone very wrong somewhere along the line. Spreadsheets are as much a calculation environment as they are a table of figures, and if you're technical enough to be writing docs in LaTeX you should be doing the calculations in a more rigorous environment where you don't copy the formulas between cells.

Excel, the world's most popular functional programming language.

Excel, the only IDE universally allowed on corporate devices

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#425

Post by takinola »

pooper wrote: post #375
lsy wrote: post #58

I guess it's not news but it is pretty wild to see the level of millenarianism espoused by all of these guys. The board of OpenAI is supposedly going to "determine the fate of the world", robotics to be "completely solved" by 2020, the goal of OpenAI is to "avoid an AGI dictatorship". Is nobody in these very rich guys' spheres pushing back on their thought process? So far we are multiple years in with much investment…

> Is nobody in these very rich guys' spheres pushing back on their thought process? I will take a wild guess and say a qualified no in the sense that nobody who report directly to these people said anything against it and my conspiracy theory is that they were not idiots who didn't have their own misgivings but they prized their own personal gain / "professional growth" by being yes men over doing what they had a pro…

There is a steelman argument for not pushing back on plans that don't make sense. You have to remember that folks like this are not just random mad men spouting crazy ideas. This is someone that has had crazy ideas in the past AND made them happen. In some cases, more than once. If you had a front row seat to watching someone deliver stuff that you thought couldn't be done, what you do when they came up with the next crazy idea? It is not unreasonable to subjugate your own judgement and just see where it goes.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#426

Post by nightowl_games »

roca wrote: post #411

I'm amazed OpenAI made these disclosures. My main takeaway was how wrong all the predictions of Sutskever and Brockman turned out to be, and how all their promises have been broken. Also interesting that up to 2019 OpenAI was focused on RL rather than LLMs.

What were their predictions?

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#427

Post by nightowl_games »

codemac wrote: post #182
freedomben wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is wildly untrue, and most in industry know that. Unfortunately you won't have a source just like I won't, but just wanted to voice that you're way off here. Sure, we probably can't know for sure who has the biggest as they try to keep that under wraps for competition purposes, but it's definitely not "wildly untrue." A simple search will show that they have if not the biggest, damn near one of the biggest. Ju…

i've physically visited a larger one, it is not even a well kept secret. we all see each other at the same airports and hotels.

Because they are all located in the same small town?

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#428

Post by error_logic »

elif wrote: post #287
kelseyfrog wrote: post #89

Maybe a weird question, but how does a capitalist economy work where AGI-performed-labor is categorically less expensive than human-performed labor? Do most people who labor for wages just go unemployed, and then bankrupt, and then die?

There are essentially two answers to this question, and neither are in the interests of capital so there will never be progress if power toward them until forced. The first is the bill gates "income tax for robots" idea which does a kind of hand wavey thing figuring out how to calculate a robot, how the government will distribute taxes, etc. That one is a mess impossible to get support for and nearly impossible to tr…

Wealth tax, with the value declared by the owner as a requirement for the government defending the property rights.

Valuations deemed too low (attempted tax evasion) can be challenged by the government by calling an owner's bluff and forcing sale to the highest bidder at the price set by the second highest bidder.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#429

Post by [deleted] »

manquer wrote: post #385
DennisP wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self-driving won't take over by just being available in the new cars people are buying anyway. It'll take over when people find it cheaper to ride robotaxis than to own a vehicle at all. That's potentially a much quicker transition, requiring significantly fewer new vehicles.

Assuming we get to your level of value prop. It will still only be a choice for new first time buyers If I already own a car, for which am paying an emi and no hope of selling for good value (because market is dropping as newest buyers disappear) it won’t make economic sense for me till I generate LTV from the car to switch over . Either way it till take 1-2 decades after ubiquitous L5 availability, even if that was…

[deleted]

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#430

Post by samatman »

averageRoyalty wrote: post #174

It's an aside, but these sorts of timelines are very American centric. I don't know when your autumn ("fall") or summer are in relation to September. Don't mix keys here, either use months or quarters, not a mix of things including some relative to a specific hemisphere.

Since you knew it was American centric, and you knew when autumn or "fall" or summer are in the Northern Hemisphere, where all† of the United States of America‡ is located,

You did, in fact, know when was referred to. It's even possible to realize that "over the summer" can include Christmas in Sydney or Buenos Aires! Mostly people realize we live on a sphere, and what the consequences of that are.

† With apologies to American Samoa.

‡ Country name spelled in full to avoid the predictable bellyaching about the existence of a continent of the same name, or two, depending on where you hail from. Another thing you are not in fact confused about.

Post reply on HN