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

OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 595 posts

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#141

Post by devin »

jackmott42 wrote: post #132
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stability straight up proved that OpenAIs ideas around the importance of locking the tech up and guard railing it is all a big waste of time. The world didn’t end when anyone could run Dall-E 2 level image gen on gamer hardware and without guardrails. Instead we got to integrate that power into tools like Blender, Photoshop, Krita etc for free. First company to democratize ChatGPT tech in the same way will own this s…

I generate Dall-E 2 level images on gamer hardware without guardrails.

That’s exactly what OP said.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#142

Post by haolez »

Lionga wrote: post #39

Nice grift by Sam Altman taking all the donations and good will a non profit gets just to flip 180. He probably would have done the same with his crypto scam startup worldcoin if it would not have failed in every way before he could scam.

But was this move made by Sam? I understand that he became CEO after a few years in. Genuinely curious.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#144

Post by pax »

auggierose wrote: post #75
Lionga wrote: post #39

Nice grift by Sam Altman taking all the donations and good will a non profit gets just to flip 180. He probably would have done the same with his crypto scam startup worldcoin if it would not have failed in every way before he could scam.

Did worldcoin fail or shut down? Is there an article about that? It seems they stopped operating in a few countries in March 2022, anything beyond that?

The last blog post is from last week, same goes for their Twitter account. (TIL Worldcoin)

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#145

Post by krageon »

api wrote: post #122
prepend wrote: post #113

I like that the corporate bullshit just keeps getting more. Google’s “don’t be evil” is many steps down from openai having open in their name. They should be called Open AI with ( not open) in small print. I argue a lot over “open source” software with non-OSI license and sometimes worry if I’m too pedantic. But I think it’s important to use terms accurately and not to confuse reality more than it already is by calli…

A lot of non-OSI open source licenses are ironically motivated by other forms of bad corporate behavior: take open source, SaaSify it, make massive profits, give nothing back. In some cases they go so far as to rebrand it and give no credit. Licenses like the SSPL try to restrict this behavior.

The AGPL (also) does this explicitly, but really there should be a general OSS license that forbids commercial use. That way the software stays where it is most needed and doesn't get abused to make profit. Is there such a license?

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#146

Post by ohgodplsno »

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #126
andrepd wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, is there anyone naive enough to have swallowed any of their trips? Corporations don't have ethical compasses, much less corporations founded by VCs aka professional salesmen.

Isn't that the point that it wasn't founded as a corporation, nor by Sam Altman? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI#:~:text=The%20organizat... .

[flagged]

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#147

Post by Aicy »

freehorse wrote: post #19
sigmoid10 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI went downhill fast after Elon left the board of directors due to a "conflict of interest" with Tesla. I don't know if he would have allowed the for-profit restructuring after giving them so much money precisely so that it didn't need profits for AI research. It probably also didn't help that he poached Karpathy from them and put him in charge of Tesla's AI efforts. So it's no surprise that there is a lot of po…

So Elon wanted to build an open source non-profit AI but had to resign from openAI, which he had cofounded with that intention, because he wanted to create a closed-source and for-profit AI for Tesla and that brought a conflict of interest. Sounds quite contradictory to me to present this as an argument to construct an image of open-source, non-profit advocate. It reads as "I support open-source etc AI as long as it…

We can have some nuance here.

Tesla was set up as a for-profit company and is such beholden to shareholders, and so using closed-source AI for profit is the path Tesla is going down.

OpenAI was set up as a non-profit company and only beholden to its values, and promised to be open-source.

These two organisations incentives contradict each other, and so it makes sense for Elon Musk to separate himself from one of them. You could argue that Elon Musk should have instead separated himself from Tesla, but that is a big ask for someone to leave their main lifetime project.

I don't think you can put the blame on Elon Musk that OpenAI later became ClosedAI (while not under his watch), some other members of OpenAI have to be responsible.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#148

Post by mellosouls »

andrepd wrote: post #108
mellosouls wrote: post #20

This seems an important article, if for no other reason than it brings the betrayal of its foundational claim still brazenly present in OpenAI's name from the obscurity of HN comments going back years into the public light and the mainstream. They've achieved marvellous things, OpenAI, but the pivot and long-standing refusal to deal with it honestly leaves an unpleasant taste, and doesn't bode well for the future, es…

Seriously, is there anyone naive enough to have swallowed any of their trips? Corporations don't have ethical compasses, much less corporations founded by VCs aka professional salesmen.

I (parent commenter) may be naive but I actually believe the original intent was probably sincere; I suspect either political shenanigans, greed, gatekeeping or any number of other vices have come rushing with success and shedloads of money, and the original ethical stance was not accompanied by the significant moral courage needed to sustain purity under enormous pressure from either less principled stakeholders, or temptation and ego.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#149

Post by atchoo »

wodenokoto wrote: post #78
mort96 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand. He's listed as one of the founders, and I always assumed he had some say. If that's really how he thinks, why wouldn't he have done something? Do we have any reason to believe this isn't just more empty grifting from him to optically distance himself from a unethical company he profits from?

Key word being "had". He is not part of it any more. >In 2018, Musk resigned his board seat, citing "a potential future conflict [of interest]" with his role as CEO of Tesla due to Tesla's AI development for self-driving cars, but remained a donor I don't think he counts as an investor, and I'd imagine he has stopped donating.

The irony here is that Musk resigned in order to pursue his own closed-source for profit AI businesses and is now complaining about OpenAI being closed-source and for profit AI.

If people are feeling conflicted about who the asshole is in this situation, don't be, they are all morally bankrupt assholes who all already have many lifetimes of unimaginable wealth yet must take ever more. These are not people who should have any power in our world.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#150

Post by ivoras »

Yeah, it sucks and the teams has acquired the reputation of sellouts, but in practical terms, does it really matter?

It looks like there's a new team with equally good or better models announced on HN every few days.

OpenAI looks like they've ingnited the field like no-one before, then did a smart move of selling to a company which has a lot of money but doesn't always know what to do with acquisitions, while at the same time that sale didn't hinder actual open development (by other teams) one iota.

Post reply on HN