251–260 of 324 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“When you strike at a king, you must kill him.”
"You come at the king, you best not miss" - Omar Little
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> most people really don't understand just how much everything is about to change So instead of hedging and saying "it's going to change some things", you play into the "it's going to change everything?". Its stereotypical grandstanding when nobody really knows what is going to happen. The AI bros and AI deniers are both exhausting crowds.
because it will change everything everything good in your life is because of applied intelligence now imagine 1000x the intelligence at 1000x the intensity
If this is true then everything bad in my life is also due to applied intelligence as intelligence itself doesn't have a moral connotation. "[N]ow imagine 1000x the intelligence at 1000x the intensity".
Both claims (everything good/bad because of intelligence) sound false to me. I guess the litmus test to the 1000x engineer (for example) is do we have 1000x the speed of product development.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The answer is that Altman tried to get the Board removed, the Board found out and snap fired him, which scared the shit out of Microsoft. The prior and new Boards both cannot make the allegation that Altman tried to commit a corporate coup, albeit for different reasons[0], so we're never going to get official confirmation of anything. My prediction is that Altman will, unmoored from any sort of accountability, wind u…
Nah, I think Microsoft will end up buying some form of assets off of OpenAI (it's a non-profit with odd corporate governance that Altman doesn't own stock in, so I don't think they'll buy the whole company) for an extremely exorbitant price. Altman will put in some ambitious but clueless Microsoft manager to run it and move on to his next thing. Then it'll turn out that Gen AI is dramatically overhyped and the real-w…
Gervais principle agrees with you.
The conclusion just raises further questions on why the coup happened, other than a "consequence of a breakdown in the relationship and loss of trust between the prior Board and Mr. Altman".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt there’s a precedent for a CEO of a “non-profit” effectively answerable to no-one and able to use it as their personal fiefdom. It’s basically a company without shareholders. I’m curious how this will play out legally. Certainly, no one with any sense will be “donating” any money in OpenAI without some strong and specific guarantees of what they’re going to be getting in return. So it can in no way can be cons…
Does the pope count as a precedent? Lots of donations head the pope’s way every day.
The pope is not a model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
because they aren't really a charity, and they aren't really interested in aligning AI. In the end, it's all an attempt to profit - with the initial marketing about charity/alignment that those with wishful thinking all bought into.
I've been watching the Y Combinator YouTube channel recently, and people in the room when OpenAI was founded were saying "… until these big companies solve AGI, it's going to be their first, second, and third goal" — not that OpenAI or Anthropic would succeed, but that this is their goal. Before the industrial revolution, land was paramount; after, capital. AGI is likely to be as significant a change, and make money…
Even if AGI becomes some form of new capital, it is still the same as capital as we know it today. Until the day humanity transcends and we no longer face the human condition of course.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> most people really don't understand just how much everything is about to change So instead of hedging and saying "it's going to change some things", you play into the "it's going to change everything?". Its stereotypical grandstanding when nobody really knows what is going to happen. The AI bros and AI deniers are both exhausting crowds.
because it will change everything everything good in your life is because of applied intelligence now imagine 1000x the intelligence at 1000x the intensity
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The church provides a number of charitable services in healthcare, education etc across the world particularly in the developing world. If you add them all up they provide the most globally. They actually do things compared to this "open" and "non profit" front of a technology company.
You're comparing apples (openness) to oranges (doing stuff). It would be weird to even ask "How much open source code and research does the Catholic Church publish?" The church does stuff away for free, sure, but then so too does ChatGPT have this shockingly powerful free tier.
The Catholic church has not only engaged in centuries of religious scholarship, it has given the knowledge freely to anyone. They even set up buildings where you can go and they will teach you what they have found, most people go on Sunday.
That isn't to mention their patronizing of the arts supported the greatest painters and composers that humanity has ever produced.
Now how many hungry has OpenAI fed?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only a lawyer can really do that in legal cases. You know how Hollywood gets computers, coding, and hacking wrong? That's how bad non-lawyers are with law. Or, pertinently to this case — who knows more law: one of us, or ChatGPT?
One of us IANAL folks have one thing ChatGPT doesn't: we don't make up stuff up.
We absolutely do make stuff up, we just don't realise we're doing it.