121–130 of 746 posts
> transition to a Public Benefit Corporation Can some business person give us a summary on PBCs vs. alternative registrations?
Theory: It allows the CEO to make decisions motivated not just by maximizing shareholder value but by some other social good. Of course, very few PBC CEOs choose to do that.
I see OpenAI's original form as the last gasp of a kind of liberal tech; in a world where "doing good" was seen as very important, the non-profit approach made sense and got a lot of people on board. These days the Altmans and the pmarcas of the world are much more comfortable expressing their authoritarian, self-centered world views; the "evolving" structure of Open AI is fully in line with that. They want to be the…
Hopelessly over-idealistic premise. Sama and pg have never been anything other than opportunistic muck. This will be my last ever comment on HN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless China handicaps the their progress as well (which they won’t, see made in China 2025), all you’re doing is handing the future to deepseek et al.
This thought process it not different than it was with nuclear weapons. The primary difference is the observability - with satellites we had some confidence that other nations respected treaties, or that they had enough reaction time for mutual destruction, but with this AI development we lack all that.
Huh, so Elon's lawsuit worked? The nonprofit will retain control? Or is this just spin on a plan that will eventually still sideline the nonprofit?
I wonder if this meets the requirements set by the recent round of outside investors?
Not according to Microsoft: https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/sam-altman-satya-nadella-rift-30...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What kind of a future is that? If China marches towards a dystopia, why should Europe dutifully follow? We can selectively ban uses without banning the technology wholesale; e.g., nuclear power generation is permitted, while nuclear weapons are strictly controlled.
> If China marches towards a dystopia, why should Europe dutifully follow? I think the more relevant question is: Do you want to live in a Chinese dystopia, or a European one?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless China handicaps the their progress as well (which they won’t, see made in China 2025), all you’re doing is handing the future to deepseek et al.
This thought process it not different than it was with nuclear weapons. The primary difference is the observability - with satellites we had some confidence that other nations respected treaties, or that they had enough reaction time for mutual destruction, but with this AI development we lack all that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing OpenAI is doing, or ever has done, has been close to AGI.
Their multimodal models are a rudimentary form of AGI. EDIT: There can be levels of AGI. Google DeepMind have proposed a framework that would classify ChatGPT as "Emerging AGI". https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.02462
I don't know if it is optimism or delusions of grandeur that drives people to make claims like AGI will be here in the next decade. No, we are not getting that.
And what do you think would happen to us humans if such AGI is achieved? People's ability to put food on the table is dependent on their labor exchanged for money. I can guarantee for a fact, that work will still be there but will it be equitable? Available to everyone? Absolutely not. Even UBI isn't going to cut it because even with UBI people still want to work as experiments have shown. But with that, there won't be a majority of work especially paper pushing mid level bs like managers on top of managers etc.
If we actually get AGI, you know what would be the smartest thing for such an advanced thing to do? It would probably kill itself because it would come to the conclusion that living is a sin and a futile effort. If you are that smart, nothing motivates you anymore. You will be just a depressed mass for all your life.
That's just how I feel.
What it really says is that if a user wants to control the interaction and get the useful responses, direct programmatic calls to the API that control the system prompt are going to be needed. And who knows how much longer even that will be allowed? As ChatGPT reports,
> "OpenAI has updated the ChatGPT UI (especially in GPT-4-turbo and ChatGPT Plus environments) to no longer expose the full system prompt or baseline prompt directly."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it reasonable to assign the descriptor “authoritarian” to anyone who simply does not subscribe to the common orthodoxy of one faction in the american culture war? That is what it seems to me is happening here, though I would love to be wrong. I have not seen anything from sama or pmarca that I would classify as “authoritarian”.
are you aware of worldcoin? altman building a centralised authority of who will be classed as "human" is about as authoritarian as you could get