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

Is Sora the beginning of the end for OpenAI?

calnewport.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–207 of 207 posts

Re: Is Sora the beginning of the end for OpenAI?

#201

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

philipallstar wrote: post #195
raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Everything about religion is fantasy and unprovable. Unless you believe that the earth is only 6500 years old, created in 7 days then a few centuries later someone built a boat that took two of each animal in the entire world to save them. Then fast forward to a man being born from a virgin that rose from the dead three days after being crucified.

You seem to be giving examples from one religion. I'm not sure that proves your statement.

So you have an example of another religion that is based on scientifically pruvablr facts?

Re: Is Sora the beginning of the end for OpenAI?

#202

Post by philipallstar »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #201
philipallstar wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be giving examples from one religion. I'm not sure that proves your statement.

So you have an example of another religion that is based on scientifically pruvablr facts?

I'm assuming you don't care about verified provable truths if you can't prove something before you said it.

Re: Is Sora the beginning of the end for OpenAI?

#203

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

philipallstar wrote: post #202
raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you have an example of another religion that is based on scientifically pruvablr facts?

I'm assuming you don't care about verified provable truths if you can't prove something before you said it.

Right. Still waiting on this religion backed up by science - Islam? Hinduism? Judaism?

Re: Is Sora the beginning of the end for OpenAI?

#204

Post by AbstractH24 »

hu3 wrote: post #163
mola wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the motivation for someone like Altman is not AGI, it's power and influence. And when he wields billions he has power, it doesn't really matter if there's AGI coming.

Yep, he just wants to become too big to fail at this point. I view OpenAI like a pyramid scheme: taking in increasing amounts of money to pursuit ever growing promisses that can be dangled like a carrot to the next investor. If you owe investors $100 million, that's your problem. If you owe investors $100 billion, that's their problem.

Who else pursued this strategy in the dot-com bubble and failed to the point of going under?

I'm old enough to remember it, but young enough not to remember it well.

Re: Is Sora the beginning of the end for OpenAI?

#205

Post by erelong »

I think some of the detractors or skeptics of AI developments like this are highly underestimating the value of these kinds of innovations like Sora, maybe because they are focusing on less productive uses of video generation (so they seem to call a lot of it "slop")

I would think instead about educational or instructional videos: now instead of hunt for them online or producing them yourself somewhat "manually", you could just use AI technology to create them. That seems "massively" beneficial and useful.

To dismiss these kinds of developments sounds akin to dismissing the development of the ability to write because "people will only use writing to make erotic fiction or jokes" (!). No one would say that. Or to developing cameras because people will "only take indecent or goofy pictures with them" (!).

Maybe people are not making as much "useful" educational or instructional material, that's fair to say.

Re: Is Sora the beginning of the end for OpenAI?

#206

Post by jrflowers »

broken-kebab wrote: post #196
jrflowers wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not a dichotomy between they say, and you imagine Buddy when it comes to strangers’ sex lives, those are pretty much the only two options. I’m trying to figure out how “healthy scepticism” in this context means anything other than making something up in your head and then believing it. Do you mean that your imaginative process is really good? > some organization's rather clunky website Trying to figure out if…

1. I'll explain, no worries! Here: the absence of verifiable source doesn't make unreliable one worthy of blind trust. So being healthy sceptical means you just don't pretend that matter is settled when it's not. In fact, it's encouraged for whatever science students to actively look for ways why self-reporting may bring invalid or distorted data, and make hypotheses stemming from that possibility. 2.I had no idea wh…

None of this post says anything about how you know stuff about stranger’s sex lives without believing what they say or imagining stuff.

Can you complete the statement “I am able to ascertain the truth of the sex lives of strangers by ignoring self-reported data or imagining things by the following process through which I reach my conclusions about strangers’ sex lives”

Now keep in mind if you want to sort of vaguely gesture at any scientific study of sexuality you have to exclude it due to your own rules. There is no such thing as a study of sexual relationships that doesn’t rely on self-reported data. I certainly hope you have the self awareness here to not attempt to imagine in your head that some self-reported data is valid (because it sort of feels right to you) but not other data (that feels icky) and then believe it. That would be kind of embarrassing.

I’m going to have to guess that by ignoring the basis of every scientific study of sexuality and not imagining things, your insight comes from your… heart? Divine revelation? Messages decoded from a numbers station? Sections of the digits in pi converted into ascii? Anime?

Re: Is Sora the beginning of the end for OpenAI?

#207

Post by jrflowers »

bossyTeacher wrote: post #197
broken-kebab wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. I'll explain, no worries! Here: the absence of verifiable source doesn't make unreliable one worthy of blind trust. So being healthy sceptical means you just don't pretend that matter is settled when it's not. In fact, it's encouraged for whatever science students to actively look for ways why self-reporting may bring invalid or distorted data, and make hypotheses stemming from that possibility. 2.I had no idea wh…

> the absence of verifiable source doesn't make unreliable one worthy of blind trust Say it louder for those who skipped scientific reasoning classes.

What did they say about researching sexuality in your scientific reasoning class

Did you do a module on verifying sexual satisfaction

Post reply on HN