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

Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 701 posts

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#351

Post by RetpolineDrama »

jay_kyburz wrote: post #303
AmericanOP wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I should cancel any plans to build on the GPT platform? Because it doesn't align with the values of Ilya and Helen? Open AI- we need clarity on your new direction.

Do you really want to build a business on a platform with 100% lock in. It not like to can just move to another AI company if you don't like their terms.

My Open AI bill was (opens dashboard...), $43,xxx last month.

First thing tomorrow I'm kicking off another round of searching for alternatives.

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#352

Post by malinens »

zone411 wrote: post #277
malinens wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Verifying phone number is one of the last things which is still effective when fighting against bot registrations. Alternative is to ask money for registration. Here is idea for hacker news crowd: make service which is a proxy for phone number validation: user needs to validate his phone number once in that app and any other 3rd-party service can ask this app for security code which confirms phone number ownership. W…

Nice idea, I hope somebody builds it. Signal just showed that they're spending $6 mil/year for verifying phone numbers.

That's why we offloaded phone validation to Telegram - it is too costly to send SMS in other countries than our home market and spammers are finding ways to get phone numbers for free from different VoIP providers. We need to implement complicated SMS sending limit logic to avoid abuse

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#353

Post by johnwheeler »

anigbrowl wrote: post #319
johnwheeler wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not saying there is lack of truth. I’m saying that’s not the real reason. It could be there’s a scandal to be found, but my guess is the hostility from OpenAI is just preemptive. There’s really no nice way to tell someone to fuck off from the biggest thing. Ever.

John, I don't think you understand how corporate law departments work. It's not like a romantic or friend breakup where someone says a mean remark about the other to underline that it's over; there's a big legal risk to the corporate entity from carelessly damaging someone's reputation like that, so it's smarter to just keep the personality/vision disagreements private and limit public statements to platitudes.

Please don’t patronize me. It indeed looks like the press release from OpenAI is under scrutiny. What you fail to understand is human nature and the way people really do things ^TM

https://twitter.com/karaswisher/status/1725685211436814795

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#354

Post by brap »

mexicanandre wrote: post #217

Ok what’s with the weird punctuation and lack of capital letters in their tweets? Both seem like they are horribly rushed and no auto complete?

Reminds me of how rich YouTubers make apology videos. No makeup (but yes makeup), no script (but yes script)... make an effort to seem effortless

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#356

Post by wavemode »

lenerdenator wrote: post #289
johnwheeler wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not saying there is lack of truth. I’m saying that’s not the real reason. It could be there’s a scandal to be found, but my guess is the hostility from OpenAI is just preemptive. There’s really no nice way to tell someone to fuck off from the biggest thing. Ever.

I mean I'm not a lawyer (of the big city or simple country varieties, or any other variety) but if you talk to most HR people they'll tell you that if they ever get a phone call from a prospective employer to confirm details about someone having worked there previously, the three things they'll typically say are: 1) a confirmation of the dates of employment 2) a confirmation of the role/title during employment 3) whe…

Someone at OpenAI hates the man's guts. It's that simple.

Even with very public cases of company leaders who did horrible things (much worse than lying), the companies that fired them said nothing officially. The person just "resigned". There's just no reason open up even the faintest possibility of an expensive lawsuit, even if they believe they can win.

So yeah, someone definitely told the lawyers to go fuck themselves when they decided to go with this inflammatory language.

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#357

Post by herval »

adastra22 wrote: post #148
anon291 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am not even sure of who really has control over things. Honestly, this is the big problem with Big Non Profit (tm). The entire structure of non-profits is really meant for ladies clubs, Rotary groups, and your church down the street, not openai and ikea.

ikea is a non-profit?!?

So is Rolex!

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#358

Post by [deleted] »

robswc wrote: post #213

Can a super smart business-y person educate this engineer on how this even happens. So, if there's 6 board members and they're looking to "take down" 2... that means those 2 can't really participate, right? Or at the very least, they have to "recuse" themselves on votes regarding them? Do the 4 members have to organize and communicate "in secret"? Is there any reason 3 members can't hold a vote to oust 1, making it a…

[deleted]

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#359

Post by LoganDark »

cthalupa wrote: post #320
soderfoo wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Sam was the face of AI to the general public, which makes these moves all the more perplexing.

I think you're likely vastly overestimating the amount of people in the general public who have any idea who Sam is at all.

https://xkcd.com/2501

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#360

Post by Sai_ »

refulgentis wrote: post #113
crop_rotation wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPT4 has been closed for a long long time, nothing technical was ever released. The board can't suddenly one day wake up from a long sleep and decide that things have to become open right this minute.

Maybe it didn't. Maybe it's been pushing on this for a bit and Altman kept paying lip service to it or made commitments in their eyes, and those weren't being followed through on

> pushing..for a bit

They could have waited another 30 mins for the markets to close before making the move. This isn’t the culmination of a long-standing problem.

Post reply on HN