Live data from Hacker News

Reflections on OpenAI

calv.info

401–410 of 446 posts

Re: Reflections on OpenAI

#401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this guy is filthy rich and yet decided to grind for 14 months with a newborn at home? I guess that's why he's filthy rich.

I had a chance to join OpenAI 13 months ago too. But I had a son 14 months ago. There was absolutely no way I was going to miss any of a critical part in my baby’s life in order to be in an office at 2am managing a bad deployment. Maybe I gave up my chance at PPU or RSU riches. But I know I chose a different kind of wealth that can never be replaced.

Wow, ditto! I thought I was the only one who took an extended leave to watch their baby grow up. Totally worth it, and it was a wonderful experience being able to focus 100% on her.

Re: Reflections on OpenAI

#402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make it sound like your choice is somehow the righteous one. I'm not convinced. What's wrong with a hiring help, as long as it's well selected? And anyway, usually the help would take care of various errands to free up mom so she can focus on her baby. But maybe they have happily involved grandparents. Maybe he was working part-time. Or maybe there's some other factor we're completely missing on right now.

So you sincerely think it’s ok that everybody takes care of the kid but the father because he’s rich and can afford multiple nannies? There’s not much context to miss when TFA has this: > The Codex sprint was probably the hardest I've worked in nearly a decade. Most nights were up until 11 or midnight. Waking up to a newborn at 5:30 every morning. Heading to the office again at 7a. Working most weekends.

Does a household necessarily need multiple nannies to raise a baby? Grandparents might be willing to help and if there's some house help as well, no nannies might be needed at all, as long as the wife is happy with the arrangement, which I don't find impossible to entertain. Yeah, wealth allows for more freedom of choice, that's always been the case, but this type of arrangement is not unheard of across social classes.

Re: Reflections on OpenAI

#404
post #336
post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be one of the cover stories for a Bond villain, but they have lots of mundane cover stories. Which isn't to say you're wrong, I've learned not to trust my gut in the category (rich business leaders) to which he belongs. I'd be more worried about the guy who tweeted “If this works, I’m treating myself to a volcano lair. It’s time.” and more recently wore a custom T-shirt that implies he's like Vito Corleone.

> I'd be more worried about the guy Or you could realize what those guys all have in common and be worried about the systems that enable them because the problem isn't a guy but a system enabling those guys to become everyone's problem. I don't mind "Vito Corleone" joking about a volcano lair. I mind him interfering in my country's elections and politics. I shouldn't have to worry about the antics of a guy building r…

Sure, but "the systems" were built by such people and are mere evolutions of the previous "I have a bigger stick" of power politics from prior to the industrial revolution.

Not that you're wrong about the systems, just that if it was as easy as changing these systems because we can tell they're bad and allow corruption, the Enlightenment wouldn't have managed to mess up with both Smith and Marx.

Re: Reflections on OpenAI

#405
post #375
post #185

Engineers thinking they're building god is such a good marketing strategy. I can't overstate it. It's even difficult to be rational about it. I don't actually believe it's true, I think it's pure hype and LLMs won't even approximate AGI. But this idea is sort of half-immune to criticism or skepticism: you can always respond with "but what if it's true?". The stakes are so high that the potentially infinite payoff sno…

I know you're not being serious but building AGI as in something that thinks like a human, as proven possible by millions of humans wandering all over the place is very different from "building god".

Except that humans cannot read millions of books (if not all books ever published) and keep track of massive amounts of information. AGI presuposes some kind of super human capabilities that no one human has. Whether that's ever accomplished remains to be seen, I personally am a bit skeptical that it will hapen in our lifetime but think it's possible in the future.

Re: Reflections on OpenAI

#406
post #375
post #185

Engineers thinking they're building god is such a good marketing strategy. I can't overstate it. It's even difficult to be rational about it. I don't actually believe it's true, I think it's pure hype and LLMs won't even approximate AGI. But this idea is sort of half-immune to criticism or skepticism: you can always respond with "but what if it's true?". The stakes are so high that the potentially infinite payoff sno…

I know you're not being serious but building AGI as in something that thinks like a human, as proven possible by millions of humans wandering all over the place is very different from "building god".

Not sure about that one. I do agree with the AI bros that, _if_ we build AGI, ASI looks inevitable shortly after, at least a "soft ASI". Because something with the agency of a human but all the knowledge of the world at its fingertips, the ability to replicate itself, think at order of magnitudes faster and paralelly on many things at the same time and modify itself... really looks like it won't stay comparable to a baseline human for long.

Re: Reflections on OpenAI

#407
post #297
post #185

Engineers thinking they're building god is such a good marketing strategy. I can't overstate it. It's even difficult to be rational about it. I don't actually believe it's true, I think it's pure hype and LLMs won't even approximate AGI. But this idea is sort of half-immune to criticism or skepticism: you can always respond with "but what if it's true?". The stakes are so high that the potentially infinite payoff sno…

> I don't actually believe it's true, I think it's pure hype and LLMs won't even approximate AGI. Not sure how you can say this so confidently. Many would argue they're already pretty close, at least on a short time horizon.

I mean, they're wrong? LLMs don't have agency, don't learn, don't do anything except react to prompts really.

Re: Reflections on OpenAI

#409
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's no longer hanging over anyone's head, The tender offer limitations still are, last I heard. Sure, maybe OA can no longer cancel your vested equity for $0... but how valuable is (non-dividend-paying) equity you can't sell? (How do you even borrow against it, say?)

Also work at OpenAI. Every tender offer has made full payouts to previous employees. Sorry to ruin your witch hunt..

I think the fact that you consider that a defense is a good illustration of why I had to ask that question. ("Yes, the gun is on the table, but the trigger has never been pulled. Sorry to ruin your witch hunt.")
Post reply on HN