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

Evolving OpenAI's Structure

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 746 posts

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#511

Post by aprilthird2021 »

NoahZuniga wrote: post #506
A_Duck wrote: post #374

This is the moment where we fumble the opportunity to avoid a repeat of Web 1.0's ad-driven race to the bottom Look forward to re-living that shift from life-changing community resource to scammy and user-hostile

Ads intermixed into llm responses is so clearly evil that openai will never do it so long as the nonprofit has a controlling stake (which it currently still has), because the nonprofit would never allow it.

Ads / SEO but with AI responses was so obviously the endgame given how much human attention it controls and the fact that people aren't really willing to pay what it costs (when decent free, open-weights alternatives exist)

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#513

Post by sumedh »

zharknado wrote: post #463
A_Duck wrote: post #374

This is the moment where we fumble the opportunity to avoid a repeat of Web 1.0's ad-driven race to the bottom Look forward to re-living that shift from life-changing community resource to scammy and user-hostile

I feel this. I had a very productive convo with an LLM today and realized that a huge part of the value of it was that it addressed my questions in a focused way, without trying to sell me anything or generate SEO rankings or register ad impressions. It just helped me. And that was incredibly refreshing in a digital world that generally feels adversarial. Then the thought came, when will they start showing ads here.…

> I like to think that if we learn to pay for it directly

The $20 monthly payment is not enough though and companies like Google can keep giving away their AI for free till OpenAI is bankrupt.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#514

Post by CooCooCaCha »

dang wrote: post #8
CooCooCaCha wrote: post #3

I'm getting really tired of hearing about OpenAI "evolving".

Ok, but can you please not post unsubstantive comments to HN? We're looking for curious conversation here, and this is not that. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

It seems like there are other comments that have the same amount of substance as mine, yet it looks like mine was the only one that was flagged.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#515

Post by hliyan »

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #13

I think this is one of the most interesting lines as it basically directly implies that leadership thinks this won't be a winner take all market: > Instead of our current complex capped-profit structure—which made sense when it looked like there might be one dominant AGI effort but doesn’t in a world of many great AGI companies—we are moving to a normal capital structure where everyone has stock. This is not a sale,…

There needs to be regulations about deceptive, indirect, purposefully ambiguous or vague public communication by corporations (or any entity). I'm not an expert in corporate law or finance, but the statement should be:

"Open AI for-profit LLC will become a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC)"

followed by: "Profit cap is hereby removed" and finally "The Open AI non-profit will continue to control the PBC. We intend it to be a significant shareholder of the PBC."

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#516

Post by Twirrim »

NoahZuniga wrote: post #506
A_Duck wrote: post #374

This is the moment where we fumble the opportunity to avoid a repeat of Web 1.0's ad-driven race to the bottom Look forward to re-living that shift from life-changing community resource to scammy and user-hostile

Ads intermixed into llm responses is so clearly evil that openai will never do it so long as the nonprofit has a controlling stake (which it currently still has), because the nonprofit would never allow it.

The insidious part is it doesn't have to be so blatant as adverts, you can achieve a lot by just slight biases in text output.

Decades ago I worked for a classical music company, fresh out of school. "So.. how do you anticipate where the music trend is going", I once naively asked one of the senior people on the product side. "Oh, we don't. We tell people really quietly, and they listen". They and the marketing team spent a lot of time doing very subtle work, easily as much as anything big like actual advertisements. Things like small little conversations with music journalists, just a dropped sentence or two that might be repeated in an article, or marginally influence an article; that another journalist might see and have an opinion on, or spark some other curiosity. It only takes a small push and it tends to spread across the industry. It's not a fast process, but when the product team is capable of road-mapping for a year or so in advance, a marketing team can do a lot to prepare things so the audience is ready.

LLMs represent a scary capability to influence the entire world, in ways we're not equipped to handle.

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#517

Post by infairverona »

addandsubtract wrote: post #460
sensanaty wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lmaoing at their casual use of AGI as if them or any of their competitors are anywhere near it.

If you change the definition of AGI, we're already there!

Damn, didn't know my Casio FX-300 was AGI, good to know!

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#518

Post by mensetmanusman »

Random question, is anyone else unable to see a ‘select all’ on their iPhone?

I was trying to put all the text into gpt4 to see what it thought, but the select all function is gone.

Some websites do that to protect their text IP, which would be crazy to me if that’s what they did considering how their ai is built. Ha

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#519

Post by pandeiro »

fourthark wrote: post #471
bentcorner wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Until an AI has agency, it is nothing but a fancy search engine/auto completer. Stepping back for a moment - do we actually want something that has agency?

Who is "we"?

Vulture Capitalists, obviously

Re: Evolving OpenAI's Structure

#520

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

esafak wrote: post #23
pants2 wrote: post #21

It's somewhat odd to me that many companies operating in the public eye are basically stating "We are creating a digital god, an instrument more powerful than any nuclear weapon" and raising billions to do it, and nobody bats an eye...

Lots of people in academia and industry are calling for more oversight. It's the US government that's behind. Europe's AI Act bans applications with unacceptable risk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Intelligence_Act

The EU can say all it wants about banning AI applications with unacceptable risk. But ASML is still selling machines to TSMC, which makes the chips which the AI companies are using. The EU is very much profiting off of the AI boom. ASML makes significantly more money than OpenAI, even.
Post reply on HN