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

511–520 of 701 posts

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#511

Post by edgyquant »

lenerdenator wrote: post #502
williamcotton wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the legal risk? Their investors sue them for..? Altman sues for..? How is the language “we are going our separate ways” compared with “Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities. The board no longer has confidence in his ability to cont…

The legal risk comes if Altman decides he wants a similar job and can't find it over the next few months or years, and has reason to believe that OpenAI's statements tainted his reputation. OpenAI's board's press release could very easily be construed as "Sam Altman is not trustworthy as a CEO", which could lead to his reputation being sullied among other possible employers. He could argue that the board defamed his…

It’s not defamation if it’s true

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#512

Post by lijok »

Jerrrry wrote: post #468
anigbrowl wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not patronizing you, I'm just responding on the same level as the post I replied to. There's an endless supply of examples of corporate/legal decisions and communication being made on very different criteria from interpersonal interactions. Of course the press release is under scrutiny, we are all wondering What Really Happened. But careless statements create significant legal (and thus financial) risk for a big…

>John >I'm not patronizing you (A)ssuming (G)ood (F)aith, referring to someone online by their name, even in an edge case where their username is their name, is considered patronizing as it is difficult to convey a tone via text medium that isn't perceived as a mockery/veiled threat. This may be a US-internet thing; analogous to getting within striking distance with a raised voice can be a capital offense in the US,…

> referring to someone online by their name is considered patronizing

This has to be a joke, right?

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#514

Post by mlyle »

blackoil wrote: post #494
mlyle wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can remember to do something tomorrow after doing many things in-between. I can reason about something and then combine it with something I reasoned about at a different time. I can learn new tasks. I can pick a goal of my own choosing and then still be working towards it intermittently weeks later. The examples we have now of GPT LLM cannot do these things. Doing those things may be a small change, or may not be t…

That just proves we real-time fine tuning of the neuron weights. It is computationally intensive but not fundamentally different. A million token context would look close to long short-term memory and frequent fine-tuning will be akin to long-term memory. I most probably am anthropomorphizing completely wrong. But point is humans may not be any more creative than an LLM, just that we have better computation and input…

Real-time fine tuning would be one approach that probably helps with some things (improving performance at a task based on feedback) but is probably not well suited for others (remembering analogous situations, setting goals; it's not really clear how one fine-tunes a context window into persistence in an LLM). There's also the concern that right now we seem to need many, many more examples in training data than humans get for the machine to get passably good at similar tasks.

I would also say that I believe that long-term goal oriented behavior isn't something that's well represented in the training data. We have stories about it, sometimes, but there's a need to map self-state to these stories to learn anything about what we should do next from them.

I feel like LLMs are much smarter than we are in thinking "per symbol", but we have facilities for iteration and metacognition and saving state that let us have an advantage. I think that we need to find clever, minimal ways to build these "looping" contexts.

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#515

Post by LatticeAnimal »

ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #385
Geee wrote: post #168

I think I see it now. Speculation following: They achieved AGI internally, but didn't want OpenAI to have it. All the important people will move to another company, following Sam, and OpenAI is left with nothing more than a rotting GPT. They planned all this from the start, which is why Sam didn't care about equity or long-term finances. They spent all the money in this one-shot gamble to achieve AGI, which can be re…

If you understand a bit of math you would know there is no AGI and there would be no AGI on the current path.

What "bit of math" are you referring to? Similarly, would you have said the same things one year ago about the capabilities that ChatGPT currently possesses?

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#517

Post by cedws »

jumploops wrote: post #244

Sam and Ilya have recently made public statements about AGI that appear to highlight a fundamental disagreement between them. Sam claims LLMs aren't sufficient for AGI (rightfully so). Ilya claims the transformer architecture, with some modification for efficiency, is actually sufficient for AGI. Obviously transformers are the core component of LLMs today, and the devil is in the details (a future model may resemble…

>Ilya claims the transformer architecture, with some modification for efficiency, is actually sufficient for AGI.

I thought this guy was supposed to know what he's talking about? There was a paper that shows LLMs cannot generalise[0]. Anybody who's used ChatGPT can see there's imperfections.

[0] https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.12288

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#518

Post by 7thaccount »

RetpolineDrama wrote: post #351
jay_kyburz wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Just out of curiosity, what are you using it for that makes it that valuable?

Re: Greg Brockman quits OpenAI

#519

Post by jrockway »

lijok wrote: post #512
Jerrrry wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>John >I'm not patronizing you (A)ssuming (G)ood (F)aith, referring to someone online by their name, even in an edge case where their username is their name, is considered patronizing as it is difficult to convey a tone via text medium that isn't perceived as a mockery/veiled threat. This may be a US-internet thing; analogous to getting within striking distance with a raised voice can be a capital offense in the US,…

> referring to someone online by their name is considered patronizing This has to be a joke, right?

I don't think it's a joke. I would find it patronizing unless I'm already on a first name basis with the commenter through some prior relationship.
Post reply on HN