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

Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 339 posts

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#291

Post by throw-qqqqq »

llm_trw wrote: post #287
throw-qqqqq wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Start building nuclear power plants like it's 1950 and keep going like it's Fallout Nuclear has a (much) higher levelized cost of energy than solar and wind (even if you include a few hours of battery storage) in many or most parts of the world. Nuclear has been stagnant for ~two decades. The world has about the same installed nuclear capacity in 2024 as it had in 2004. Not in percent (i.e. “market share”) but in a…

And yet when data enters need power all day every day nuclear is the only solution. Even Bill Gates stop selling solar when it wasn't for the poors who probably don't need hot water every day anyway.

As long as you can buy energy, you should choose the cheapest source (Levelized Cost of Energy). Which is renewables in most places.

I don’t think blackouts are very common for grid connected data centers :)?

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#292

Post by Seattle3503 »

foobiekr wrote: post #269
Seattle3503 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "We are turning our non profit into a for profit because we want to make money" isn't legal. Source? The NFL did this because they were already making a lot of money. As I understand it, the tax laws practically required the change.

OpenAI isn't making money. They are like a giant furnace for investment dollars. Even putting aside that the NFL and OpenAI aren't the same kind of entity, there is also no taxes issue.

That doesn't explain how the conversion is illegal.

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#293

Post by Seattle3503 »

jefftk wrote: post #215
Seattle3503 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah interesting. How are those different?

The key thing is that assets of a 501c3 are irrevocably dedicated to charitable purposes, which is not the case for a 501c6. If the NFL had somehow started as a 501c3 before realizing that was a bad structure for their work, the standard approach would be for the 501c3 to sell their assets at fair market value to new for-profit. Then either those proceeds could be donated to other 501c3s, or the old NFL could continu…

Interesting, TIL. That is the basis for why the conversion is illegal?

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#294

Post by llm_trw »

throw-qqqqq wrote: post #291
llm_trw wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet when data enters need power all day every day nuclear is the only solution. Even Bill Gates stop selling solar when it wasn't for the poors who probably don't need hot water every day anyway.

As long as you can buy energy, you should choose the cheapest source (Levelized Cost of Energy). Which is renewables in most places. I don’t think blackouts are very common for grid connected data centers :)?

What is the price of sunlight at midnight?

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#295

Post by defrost »

llm_trw wrote: post #294
throw-qqqqq wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as you can buy energy, you should choose the cheapest source (Levelized Cost of Energy). Which is renewables in most places. I don’t think blackouts are very common for grid connected data centers :)?

What is the price of sunlight at midnight?

Varies by latitude, season, and spanning length and capacity of intra grid connecting HVDC cables

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#296

Post by ryao »

llamaimperative wrote: post #248
ryao wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That assumes you believe his claims of disaster. We already have been through this with the printing press, telecommunications, computers and the internet. The claims of disaster are overrated.

You conveniently left out nuclear weapons and bioweapons, both of which are actually capable of destroying the world and both of which are very, very tightly controlled accordingly. It's pretty obvious that a technology's capacity for good rises in lockstep with its capacity for evil. Considering that every technology is just a manifestation of intelligence, then AI would trend toward infinite capacity for good as it…

A collection of matrix weights is not an weapon. Those have nothing in common.

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#297

Post by throw-qqqqq »

llm_trw wrote: post #294
throw-qqqqq wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as you can buy energy, you should choose the cheapest source (Levelized Cost of Energy). Which is renewables in most places. I don’t think blackouts are very common for grid connected data centers :)?

What is the price of sunlight at midnight?

Most people do not buy from specific sources of production. They buy “from the grid”, the constituents of which are a dynamic mix of production sources (solar, wind, hydro, nuclear and fossile where I live).

Wind is strong at night when solar produces nothing. Same in the winter months.

As I said: if the power consumer is grid connected, this does not matter. Example: I have power in the socket even at night time :)

As long as you have uninterrupted power (i.e. as long as connected to the grid), the important metric is mean cost of energy, not capacity factor of the production plant.

For a nuclear sub or a space ship, which is not grid connected, capacity factor is very important. But data centers are usually grid connected.

> when data enters need power all day every day nuclear is the only solution

Do you think data centers running at night are running exclusively on nuclear-generated power :)?

We already have lots of data centers that need power all day every day. Most are just grid connected. It works.

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#298

Post by llamaimperative »

ryao wrote: post #296
llamaimperative wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You conveniently left out nuclear weapons and bioweapons, both of which are actually capable of destroying the world and both of which are very, very tightly controlled accordingly. It's pretty obvious that a technology's capacity for good rises in lockstep with its capacity for evil. Considering that every technology is just a manifestation of intelligence, then AI would trend toward infinite capacity for good as it…

A collection of matrix weights is not an weapon. Those have nothing in common.

Neither is a snippet of genetic code nor a chunk of uranium...

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#299

Post by moralestapia »

paxys wrote: post #53

I don't understand why they are spending so much time and effort trying to put a positive spin on this whole for-profit thing. No one is buying it. We all know what's going on. Just say "we want to make lots of money" and move on with your lives.

It's not for you (or me, or us), it's for the upcoming lawsuit.

Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission

#300

Post by ilyagr »

paxys wrote: post #53

I don't understand why they are spending so much time and effort trying to put a positive spin on this whole for-profit thing. No one is buying it. We all know what's going on. Just say "we want to make lots of money" and move on with your lives.

They are trying to convince themselves that is not the reason, because they'd like to think of themselves as above such trivial concerns as greed, and hunger for power, and fear of somebody else beating them to it and having power over them. So, they want to call their feelings as something else, something noble.

And then, as others point out, they are also interested in other people believing this, whether for employees or lawsuits. But I think that would not justify saying these same things again and again, when by now they have nothing new to say and people have mostly made up their mind.

Post reply on HN