> The impotence of naive idealism in the face of economic incentives A great point. I saw blinding idealism during the early days of GPT era.
The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
11–20 of 411 posts
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#12Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#13Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#14- we are building Open AI - only if you have more than $10B net worth
- we are against using AI for military purposes - except when that case is allowed by government
- we are on a mission to help humanity - again, we define humanity as set of people with more than $10B net worth
- surrender? - sure, sure, we will, only to people with more than $10B net worth, they can do whatever they want to our models, we will surrender to them
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#15Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#16The way Sam Altman bungled the Pentagon deal by swooping in a few hours after Anthropic was fired should be grounds for OpenAI finding another CEO.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#17And that's it.
Everything beyond that is nuance.
Nuance matters, but it's not the real story, it's the side show.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#18The way Sam Altman bungled the Pentagon deal by swooping in a few hours after Anthropic was fired should be grounds for OpenAI finding another CEO.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#19Laws & regulations that needs to be created to reign in AI will undoubtedly increase the opportunity cost of training LLMs.
For some, it might be similar to the early 2000s, but I think it's just a healthy rebalance of what AI is, and how the society needs to implement this new, hardly controllable, paradigm. With this perspective, OpenAI has a lot to lose as it hasn't been able to create a moat for itself compared to, let's say, Anthropic.
Re: The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines
#20Even the quote they used questions the premise of the article
> “We basically have built AGI” (later: “a spiritual statement, not a literal one”)