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

461–470 of 678 posts

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#461

Post by lupire »

sumedh wrote: post #374
hermannj314 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One year ago I gave openAi $100 to have credits for small hobby projects that use their API. They expired and disappeared and then openAi charged me $100 to reload my lost money. I am sure this is what I agreed to, but I personally thought I was hacked or something because I didnt expect this behavior from them. They lost me as an API user and monthly chatgpt plus user. I hope it was worth it. They want enterprise, b…

[flagged]

> They expired and disappeared

There's no button for that.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#462

Post by marcosdumay »

kulahan wrote: post #199
marcosdumay wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Land on Mars is cheap... But no, I really doubt that's all it takes. Unless you discount all of the R&D costs as SpaceX operational expenses.

I imagine that's what he's doing. He's willing to put a lot of company money into getting the city on Mars started, because if he's first there, he's gonna set himself (or his dynasty?) up to make hundreds of billions of dollars. Being effectively in control of your own planet? Neat. Scary too.

Hum... You (or he, or whoever) can't practically be in control of an entire planet.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#463

Post by 123yawaworht456 »

harrall wrote: post #415
this_user wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wasn't he fired for questionable reasons? There were a number of concerns, including for-profit projects he was pursuing despite his public insistence on OpenAI being non-profit as well as generally deceptive behaviour on his part. The last part at least is consistent with what others have said about Altman previously, including what allegedly led to his exit from YC, although they have kept those stories pretty qu…

Don’t pay much particular attention to AI but I’m not seeing the knock on him saying “no.” What human in the world could be trusted with AI? Only delusional people could say yes to that question.

a smartphone can be used to guide an ICBM.

what human in the would could be trusted with it?

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#464

Post by Yeul »

bayarearefugee wrote: post #459
yard2010 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This guy is outright scary. He gives me the chills.

the whole group of these techbro billionaires come off as barely human ghouls when you hear them speak, imo see also: peter thiel on piers morgan recently.

They probably know that nobody would vote for them which is why they fund Trump and other politicians who do have social skills.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#465

Post by throwoutway »

lesuorac wrote: post #105
factorialboy wrote: post #25

For-profit isn't the problem. Lying about being non-profit to raise funds, and _then_ become for-profit, that's the underlying concern.

Too bad not disclosing that you always intended to convert the non-profit into a for-profit during your testimony while numerous senators congratulate you about your non-profit values isn't problematic. https://www.techpolicy.press/transcript-senate-judiciary-sub...

Can this be considered perjury?

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#466

Post by kulahan »

marcosdumay wrote: post #462
kulahan wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine that's what he's doing. He's willing to put a lot of company money into getting the city on Mars started, because if he's first there, he's gonna set himself (or his dynasty?) up to make hundreds of billions of dollars. Being effectively in control of your own planet? Neat. Scary too.

Hum... You (or he, or whoever) can't practically be in control of an entire planet.

Being first to market matters a lot, is my main point.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#467

Post by slibhb »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #251
slibhb wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite a goal post move from "just go unemployed, and then bankrupt, and then die" to "poverty impacts health"

I didn't say health; you did. I said mortality which is synonymous with death. Misquoting someone to prove a point is intellectually bankrupt. Take a breath and calm down. Why don't you try stealmanning instead?

"Negatively impacts mortality" doesn't mean "kills" or "causes to die". "Bad for health" is a better interpretation. Do you really believe that unemployment + bankruptcy = death? If you don't believe that, then why are you writing sentences like this:

> Do most people who labor for wages just go unemployed, and then bankrupt, and then die?

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#468

Post by ilrwbwrkhv »

Biologist123 wrote: post #198

I’m neither an Elon fanboy nor a hater. But I do wonder both what he possesses and is possessed by to have created not just a successful company, but era-defining companies plural.

SpaceX is era defining. The rest are pretty run of the mill.

One could also say that SpaceX happened because the US desperately needed a launch vehicle of their own.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#469

Post by danielmarkbruce »

agnosticmantis wrote: post #440
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amongst people who think probabilistically, this isn't a weird statement. It's a very low precision guestimate. There is a qualitative difference between 50-50, 90-10, 99-1 etc, and it's only their best guess anyway.

Just because you can generate numbers between 0 and 1 doesn't make them meaningful probabilities. Are these based on data? No, they're rhetorical tools used to sound quantitative and scientific. Nobody will be applying the calculus of probability to these meaningless numbers coming out of someone's ass. And most importantly, is he himself willing to bet a significant fraction of his fortune based on these socalled pr…

A conversation like this happens every minute between investors, people who work at hedge funds, trader types, bookies, people who work in cat insurance etc. They just think this way. They are "priors" in Bayes world. Based on intuition. Notice the lack of precision. Nobody says "50%" or "10%" to sound scientific. I'm 99.9% certain it's better than using ambiguous terms "likely", "probably", "certainly possible" and so on.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#470

Post by sourcepluck »

madrox wrote: post #223
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…

I think an assumption that a lot of people make about people with power is that they say what they actually believe. In my experience, they do not. Public speech is a means to an end, and they will say whatever is the strongest possible argument that will lead them to what they actually want. In this case, OpenAI wants look like they're going to save the world and do it in a noble way. It's Google's "don't be evil" a…

I'll sleep easier tonight after reading this! I know other people know what you say there, but at times reading HN one would suspect that it's not that commonly known around these parts.

Maybe public figures were "saying what they meant" in, I don't know, the mid-1800s. People who grew up with "modern" communications and media infrastructure (smartphones, brain rot, streaming garbage 24/7, ads everywhere, etc) do not have the capacity to act in a non-mediatic fashion in public space anymore.

So that's the reality, I think. Not only is Sam Altman "fake" in public, so is everyone else (more or less), including you and I.

Nonetheless, it's a national sport at least in massive chunks of the English-speaking world now to endlessly speculate about the real intentions of these pharaonic figures. I've said it before, but I'll say it again: what a very peculiar timeline.

Post reply on HN