OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit • Hacker News Board

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#591

Post by robertlagrant » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 12:56 PM UTC

fsckboy wrote: post #503

robertlagrant wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain? I think I'm reading it wrong, but it seems as though you're saying the presence of something is what causes starvation of that thing.

no, he's saying other areas that could use smart people are being starved of a certain type of smart, analytical people, for example the types or quantities of people who might be attracted to the medical field. Lester Thurow, a pretty left liberal economist, pointed out that women's "liberation" and entrance into the general workforce had starved teaching/education of the pool of talented women that had previously k…

Ah, I see. Thanks.

In terms of doctors, I think there is a counterbalancing effect of sorts, whereby some administration can be digitised and communication is more efficient, but it probably doesn't make up for the lack of additional candidates.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#592

Post by hollerith » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 3:41 AM UTC

93po wrote: post #240

mhb wrote: post #216

Well, Eliezer thinks it's better for it to be closed source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Aq82XqYhgqdPdPrBA/full-trans... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34969892

Eliezer says anything, for conscious or unconscious reasons, to further spread his opinions as fact. There is also a large profit incentive for him to do so, since his foundation and personal income depends on donations from people who are concerned about AI safety. I've seen him imply some pretty ridiculous things that amount to hyperbole. He is ultimately doing nothing in the engineering and development side of AI…

Eliezer started his career focused on the benefits of AI. It was not till the non-profit he founded had been going for 5 years that he started talking about the dangers of AI.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#593

Post by z3c0 » Thu, Mar 09, 2023, 12:20 PM UTC

panick21_ wrote: post #131

z3c0 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it though? Just because somebody follows Musk does not mean they engage with his content enough for it to be floated up past everything else they may follow. It's very likely that a great deal of those followers don't find his content interesting, but don't find it objectionable enough to unfollow him.

I mean, an impression counts views normally right? It would seem strange that so few people saw the tweet. Its also the case that he usually gets quite a few retweets and often lots of responses as well. So the number just seem low to me.

I missed this prior to now, but (in my experience with web analytics - I'm not a Twitter dev) impressions are typically when it appears in a users view. A "scroll past" is usually enough, because advertisers just want to know that it made it in front of somebody. Their marketers will handle "grabbing your attention." However, whether it ever makes it to a users view to begin with is determined by "The Algorithm", which would be seeded by a users past interactions. Ignore Musk tweets enough, and presumably, they'll stop showing up by default.

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#594

Post by norswap » Sat, Mar 11, 2023, 5:03 PM UTC

camillomiller wrote: post #357

IAmNotACellist wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is nice to see normies noticing and caring, but the article leaves out some details that obscure comments still stubbornly bring up: like Musk founded it as a 501(c)(3) and put Altman in charge, and only once he had to leave with conflicts of interest Altman founded "OpenAI LP," the for-profit workaround so they didn't have to obey those pesky charity rules. That's when they stopped releasing models and weights, a…

People keep forgetting we're talking about Sam Altman, someone who believed that scanning the world's population retinas in exchange for some crappy digital coin was a great idea and not a creepy spinoff of a shoddy sci-fi novel.

It's important to note that WorldCoin does not get to see the retinas, whose picture never leave the orb (and are deleted after the fact), but only a hash of them. The orb's hardware blueprints and the software is open source too.

The system attempts to solve an important problem: figure out who's a human (not a robot) online. One could argue Sam is creating the problem as well as the solution, I suppose. Still, it's better than only having the problem.

Right now the problem does not seem extremely pressing, but I believe it might become more so.

Even if we don't see rampant abuse of AIs masquerading as humans, another ambition of WorldCoin is to perform wide-ranging experiments in UBI, and being able to distinguish "real" humans in that context is absolutely crucial. This goes doubly in the third world, where people often simply don't have IDs (and available forms of IDs can be easily manufactured through bribery).

(That being said, I broadly agree with the criticism of OpenAI laid out in the above article. Still, we can have nuance.)

Re: OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit

#595

Post by AndrewKemendo » Tue, Mar 14, 2023, 9:41 PM UTC

robertlagrant wrote: post #590

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Convince a few rich people to not expect infinite returns in order to bootstrap it.

If your model relies on the existence of a few rich people then is it generally applicable? Or does it only work in a world where most people don't follow that model?

First of all, I don't have a model

Second, this is the only practical way I can think of for individuals to start