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

OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

web.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 70 posts

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#5

Post by ExoticPearTree »

I’ve seen parts of the Congress testimony of Sam Altman amd it felt like the guy was on a power trip with his regulation ideas.

What he accomplished with OpenAI is for the history books, but wanting monopoly over AI development in the US makes him look like an up and coming villain.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#7

Post by aunty_helen »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #5

I’ve seen parts of the Congress testimony of Sam Altman amd it felt like the guy was on a power trip with his regulation ideas. What he accomplished with OpenAI is for the history books, but wanting monopoly over AI development in the US makes him look like an up and coming villain.

It's almost as if he's changed his tune since having 10b$ invested in his company.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#8

Post by jstummbillig »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #5

I’ve seen parts of the Congress testimony of Sam Altman amd it felt like the guy was on a power trip with his regulation ideas. What he accomplished with OpenAI is for the history books, but wanting monopoly over AI development in the US makes him look like an up and coming villain.

Nothing that he said in Congress supports the claim that he wants monopoly over AI development.

I find it fascinating how people are so happy to turn argumentation on it's head, and pretend it's the same thing. Surely you must know you are doing it? But what is to gain, I do not know.

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#9

Post by usrbinbash »

Whether scaling laws hold or not, is up for debate.

What isn't up for debate, is that:

    1) Giant serverfarms are expensive
    2) People want on premises/on machine solutions
    3) LoRA Tuning of small models continues to excel
    4) Thus specialized models continue to evolve at a fast pace
    5) Open source foundation models on which tuning can be done are accelerating by the week
    6) Performance doesn't matter once a model is "good enough" for a given task
The long and short of it is this: LLMs are a fantastic technology, and people want to have it. And they want to have it local, private, and as cheap as possible. Just one example, how many devs are out there who would love having a local LLM model integrated into their IDE? The answer: Yes.

And again I draw your attention to point 6): For such use-cases, It doesn't matter if a gargantuan model performs a bit better ... if the small model is good enough for the task, then it wins, purely by being private, offline and is free to use.

We are already at a point, where small models are competitive for specialized tasks, and aren't performing bad at all as general models either. What will it take for bigger models to out-perform them so enourmously that customers simply have no other choice than to use them? A 5x increase in size? 10x? 100x? Where do we run models with trillions of params? What will that cost, and how available will that be?

Re: OpenAI's plans according to Sam Altman

#10

Post by devoutsalsa »

jstummbillig wrote: post #8
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #5

I’ve seen parts of the Congress testimony of Sam Altman amd it felt like the guy was on a power trip with his regulation ideas. What he accomplished with OpenAI is for the history books, but wanting monopoly over AI development in the US makes him look like an up and coming villain.

Nothing that he said in Congress supports the claim that he wants monopoly over AI development. I find it fascinating how people are so happy to turn argumentation on it's head, and pretend it's the same thing. Surely you must know you are doing it? But what is to gain, I do not know.

As I understand it, most people's objection to the calls for regulation are based on the fact that regulation raises the barriers to entry for competition. Regulatory compliance can be expensive and favors those with deep pockets. The more AI startups one can prevent from starting/growing now, the fewer competitors there will be in the future.
Post reply on HN