Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they were popular at OpenAI, I would say they have a good chance of succeeding too. They could offer excellent equity packages to all the best engineers and researchers and due to the non-profit nature of OpenAI (and hence no equity), these people might be very tempted to leave.
OpenAI is supposedly “capped profit” so employees do get equity with limited upside. But yeah, since Sam and Greg were apparently pushed out because they were building too good of a business any OpenAI employees that were aligned with them are likely to jump ship and join them, and OpenAI will revert to the non-profit research lab it started out as.
Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
381–390 of 711 posts
Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#382Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who grey-texted this comment? So confused who could disagree with it. Is that the problem, this comment is so obviously true, it's just redundant?
The problem is that you cannot finance the training of a competitive AI model and then turn around and give it all away for free. Who's supposed to pay for that?
Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#383Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI today is in a weird position. What I can do today with AI was _inimaginable_ just 1 year ago. However, for a lot of people, the concept has worn out so fast, that they don't realize anymore what has happened... Some very intelligent people said some very silly things, such as that it was a bad search engine (it isn't a search engine) that it was a glorified word guesser (it doesn't exactly work as your telephone w…
> Talking to a computer to bring it to make some quite complicated task is INCREDIBLE... Are there any good examples of this? I struggle to use ChatGPT, maybe I'm using it not cleverly (or deeply) enough.
Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#384It seems like firing Sam and causing this massive brain drain might be antithetical to the whole AGI mission of the original non-profit. If OpenAI loses everyone to Sam and he starts some new AI company, it probably won't be capped-profit and just be a normal company. All of the organizational safeguards OpenAI had inked with Microsoft and protection against "selling AGI" once-developed are out-the-window if he just…
We barely understand how consciousness works, we should stop talking about "AGI". It is just empty, ridiculous techno-babble. Sorry for the harsh language, there's no nice way to drive home this point.
Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#385Just seen their departure tweets (link below) What’s with this annoying trend of omitting capital letters from comms? https://x.com/gdb/status/1725667410387378559?s=20
Ironically some of us haven't gotten used to this yet either.
But it does look very weird. the full stop at the end of a capitalless sentence followed by an ellipsis is what sticks out to me, seems very tryhard.
Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#386Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#387GPT5 pre-training just ended I believe. Brock, Pachocki, Szymon Sidor, would have likely all been involved. These are huge losses. Pachocki led pre-training for GPT-4, and probably GPT-5. Brockman is the major engineer responsible for the efficiency improvements that enabled ChatGPT and GPT-4 to be even remotely cost-effective. That is a piece that is often overlooked, but OpenAI's advantage over the competition in c…
"Greg Brockman works 60 to 100 hours per week, and spends around 80% of the time coding. Former colleagues have described him as the hardest-working person at OpenAI." https://time.com/collection/time100-ai/6309033/greg-brockman...
Let's first define 'coding' before we jump into the details: 'coding' for me is sitting at your computer doing the work. It's not getting a coffee, chatting with a colleague, going to toilet or reading hacker news. So if you're reading this and claiming to do 100 hours per week of productive time, I call bullshit on that.
Being at the office for 60 to 100 hours, sure, I believe that.
When I was studying for exams at University, I did more than half of the work before noon. The rest was spread out over the afternoon and evening. At 20:00 my brain was dead. I could read a sentence, and nothing would stick. Read it again, impossible to process it.
So I always wondered how these other students could study until 2am in the morning. Well, turned out they didn't do shit in the morning. That's how they studied "all the way into the night".
Now back to my programming career: At my best I do 4 to 6 hours of concentrated coding per day. At my best, nobody seriously outperformed me. So if you claim to do more than x2 the work that I'm doing, I would love to see the output of that.
People like Cal Newport basically confirm what I've seen over the years. So do habits of the most famous authors.
Now, I can be convinced that it's actually possible. Take a look at Carmack, who claims to do 12 hours a day. He doesn't seem to be a bullshitter to me. So either he's counting time that I wouldn't count, like dungeon mastering a D&D game, or playtesting, or whatever. Or he's actually a super human work machine. Now he worked with Abrash, who seemed to do more sane hours. And in the end Carmack had high respect for the output of Abrash.
So yeah, if you know people who can actually do 14 hours of high concentrated coding 7 days out of 7, I would love to hear it and get some kind of confirmation that they're not browsing reddit and HN 50% of that time. And if you're reading this and claim to do 14 hours a day of concentrated work, I call bullshit on that you HN addict!
Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#388Earlier quoted context omitted.
The world needs more truly open source AI models where the success and outcomes do not depend on a single figurehead or a corporation.
The truth or falsity of this statement turns entirely on whether more AI is good or not. You are in agreement with doomers that single figureheads are a weakpoint. That's the point. The disagreement is on whether having massive uncontrollable power widely dispersed is beneficial.
Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you forgetting its a nonprofit? How could the board be fired? What does their charter say is the mechanism for removing a board member?
Yeah, I misspoke earlier. Although nobody has actual power on paper, public and investor pressure can be just as influential.
Parting ways with OpenAI might be the only option if the org remains firm on the direction it has chosen. Build internally to reach capability parity and then accelerate ahead of them while slowly rolling out of the agreement with OpenAI, reallocating those previously committed resources internally.
“Due to the actions of OpenAI’s board, Microsoft had no choice but defend its investment in this revolutionary technology.” The pr wire writes itself.
Re: Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI
#390So what was he lying about that got the board so pissed? A story that fits is that they assumed/knew that he had different goals and/or was going to create a spinoff. If they waited for the GPT5 pretraining to finish and then they minimized the cost of the loss of Altman and the engineers. The whole secrecy, compartmentalization and urgency of their actions could only be explained by being against a wall. Otherwise i…
Probably the Microsoft thing and the direction Sam Altman is taking OpenAI. I imagine that caused a significant shift in workload and nature of work for the people in OpenAI.