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

OpenAI to become for-profit company

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 809 posts

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#331

Post by lolinder »

cowpig wrote: post #322
lolinder wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why anyone would believe anything this guy is saying, though, especially now that we know he's going to receive a 7% stake in the now-for-profit company. There are two main interpretations of what he's saying: 1) He sincerely believes that AGI is around the corner. 2) He sees that his research team is hitting a plateau of what is possible and is prepping for a very successful exit before the rest of the…

This is a false dichotomy. Clearly getting money and control are the main objectives here, and we're all operating over a distribution of possible outcomes.

I don't think so. If Altman is prepping for an exit (which I think he is), I'm having a very hard time imagining a world in which he also sincerely believes his company is about to achieve AGI. An exit only makes sense if OpenAI is currently at approximately its peak valuation, not if it is truly likely to be the first to AGI (which, if achieved, would give it a nearly infinite value).

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#332

Post by dingnuts »

llm_trw wrote: post #232
barbazoo wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely the legal system just hasn’t caught up.

Maybe, but for the first time in a century there is more money to be made in weakening copyright rather than strengthening it.

god forbid that actually be happening in a way to improve the commons

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#333

Post by lolinder »

ChrisArchitect wrote: post #330
lolinder wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That one never made it to the front page because reasons. All that discussion was people reading the story elsewhere and going looking for the HN thread.

never made it? That's the thread. The discussion is there. Long before this one. Lots of people saw it, commented on it. It's a dupe. Stop splitting the discussion up.

It was never above page 4 (position 90):

https://hnrankings.info/41651548/

This version of the thread is the first to have had any traction on the front page.

When the algorithm artificially stops a topic from surfacing to the front page, the article that finally makes it past the algorithm's suppression is not a duplicate, it's the canonical copy.

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#334

Post by golergka »

lioeters wrote: post #104
bayindirh wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The most surprising thing to me in this is that the non-profit will still exist. That entity will scrape the internet and train the models and claim that "it's just research" to be able to claim that all is fair-use. At this point it's not even funny anymore.

Scraping the entire internet for training data without regard for copyright or attribution - specifically to use for generative AI to produce similar content for profit. How this is being allowed to happen legally is baffling. It does suit the modus operandi of a number of American companies that start out as literally illegal/criminal operations until they get big and rich enough to pay a fine for their youthful mis…

If information is publicly available to be read by humans, I fail to see any reason why it wouldn't be also available to be read by robots.

Update: ML doesn't copy information. It can merely memorise some small portions of it.

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#335

Post by SoftTalker »

mdgrech23 wrote: post #126
lioeters wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scraping the entire internet for training data without regard for copyright or attribution - specifically to use for generative AI to produce similar content for profit. How this is being allowed to happen legally is baffling. It does suit the modus operandi of a number of American companies that start out as literally illegal/criminal operations until they get big and rich enough to pay a fine for their youthful mis…

The people running the show are well connected and stand to make billions as do would be investors. Give a few key players a share in the company and they forget their government jobs to regulate.

They are also moving so much faster than the regulators and legislatures, it's just impossible for people working basically the same way they did in the 19th century to keep up.

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#336

Post by philwelch »

bbor wrote: post #88
freedomben wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, a non-profit is one in which there are no shareholders. The non-profit entity can own a lot and be extremely successful and wealthy, but it cannot give that money to any shareholders. It can pay out large salaries, but those salaries are scrutinized. It doesn't prevent abuse, and it certainly doesn't prevent some unscrupulous person from becoming extremely wealthy with a non-profit, but it is a little more compli…

Yes: non-profits usually have members , not shareholders. And, most importantly: non-profit charities (not the only kind of nonprofit, but presumably what OpenAI was) are legally obligated to operate “for the public good”. That’s why they’re tax exempt: the government is basically donating to them, with the understanding that they’re benefiting the public indirectly by doing so, not just making a few people rich. In…

> God I hope Merrick Garland isn’t asleep at the wheel. They’ve been trust busting like mad during this administration, so hopefully they’re taking aim at this windmill, too.

Little chance of that as Sama is a big time Democrat fundraiser and donor.

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#337

Post by golergka »

ceejayoz wrote: post #299
idunnoman1222 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recording devices, you know a record player had a profound effect on artists. go back

That seems like a poor comparison. Recording devices permitted artists to sell more art. Many of the uses of AI people get most excited about seem to be cutting the expensive human creators out of the equation.

Recording devices destroyed most of the musician's jobs. Vast majority of musicians who were employed before advent of recordings didn't have their own material and were not good enough to make good recordings anyway. Same with artists now: the great ones will be much more productive, but the bottom 80-90% won't have anything to do anymore.

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#338

Post by vezycash »

llm_trw wrote: post #232
barbazoo wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely the legal system just hasn’t caught up.

Maybe, but for the first time in a century there is more money to be made in weakening copyright rather than strengthening it.

> for the first time in a century there is more money to be made in weakening copyright rather than strengthening it

Nope. The law will side with whoever pays the most. Once OpenAI solidifies its top position, only then will regulations kick in. Take YouTube, for example—it grew thanks to piracy. Now, as the leader, ContentID and DMCA rules work in its favor, blocking competition. If TikTok wasn’t a copyright-ignoring Chinese company, it would’ve been dead on arrival.

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#339

Post by [deleted] »

ChrisArchitect wrote: post #330
lolinder wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That one never made it to the front page because reasons. All that discussion was people reading the story elsewhere and going looking for the HN thread.

never made it? That's the thread. The discussion is there. Long before this one. Lots of people saw it, commented on it. It's a dupe. Stop splitting the discussion up.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI to become for-profit company

#340

Post by ChrisArchitect »

lolinder wrote: post #333
ChrisArchitect wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

never made it? That's the thread. The discussion is there. Long before this one. Lots of people saw it, commented on it. It's a dupe. Stop splitting the discussion up.

It was never above page 4 (position 90): https://hnrankings.info/41651548/ This version of the thread is the first to have had any traction on the front page. When the algorithm artificially stops a topic from surfacing to the front page, the article that finally makes it past the algorithm's suppression is not a duplicate, it's the canonical copy.

So what if it didn't make the front page. That doesn't mean ppl didn't see it. Doesn't mean ppl aren't commenting on it. Maybe it's just not that interesting. There was also a lot of other big news at the same time with Meta etc taking attention. And followed by the other OpenAI news with Mira. Again, the discussion is there.
Post reply on HN