61–70 of 165 posts
This is incredible. I can't tell how much this is cherry-picked examples vs. revolutionary new tech.
Yeah I can't tell exactly which ones but I really feel like some of the OpenAI demos of products could be potentially huge if fleshed out.
AGI in text is < 3yrs away.
AGI in text is < 3yrs away.
OpenAI started as a non-profit, went for-profit. Still owned by the big players.... Something isn't right. Is OpenAI just a submarine so the tech giants can do unethical research without taking blame??? Its textbook misdirection, nonprofit and "Open" in the name, hero-esque mission statement. How do you make the mental leap from "we're non-profit and we won't release things too dangerous" to "JK we're for-profit and…
I can’t say I blame them, when they realize they are sitting on the technological equivalent of a mountain of gold. What would you do?
OpenAI started as a non-profit, went for-profit. Still owned by the big players.... Something isn't right. Is OpenAI just a submarine so the tech giants can do unethical research without taking blame??? Its textbook misdirection, nonprofit and "Open" in the name, hero-esque mission statement. How do you make the mental leap from "we're non-profit and we won't release things too dangerous" to "JK we're for-profit and…
It looks like a similar organizational structure as Mozilla Foundation + Mozilla Corporation.
They're directly selling GPT 3 even though they originally said they wouldn't release it because of potential bad uses.
They paid MS a ton of money for hardware and got a huge equity investment from them.
And lets be honest here, the easiest and most straight-forward use of GPT3 is generating spam and low quality clickbait. Its the only use case that requires zero effort. The whole thing is built to generate fake but believable text. Its DeepFakes for text.
I'm not saying the whole thing is nefarious and evil, just suggesting that OpenAI may not be what it seems. There's a lot of odd things going on with it. They should have done what universities do, spin off the technology into a different for-profit company and sell it. Instead of redefining their entire org structure to make money.
OpenAI started as a non-profit, went for-profit. Still owned by the big players.... Something isn't right. Is OpenAI just a submarine so the tech giants can do unethical research without taking blame??? Its textbook misdirection, nonprofit and "Open" in the name, hero-esque mission statement. How do you make the mental leap from "we're non-profit and we won't release things too dangerous" to "JK we're for-profit and…
In one of their examples, they note “They saw ratings hover around 60% with their original, in-house tech — this improved by 7-8% with GPT-2 — and is now in the 80-90% range with the API.” Bloomberg reports the API is based on GPT-3 and “other language models”. If that’s true, this is a big deal, and it epitomizes OpenAI’s namesake. The largest NLP models require vast corporate resources to train, let alone put into…
It's only Open™️ if I can run the API on my own machines.
OpenAI started as a non-profit, went for-profit. Still owned by the big players.... Something isn't right. Is OpenAI just a submarine so the tech giants can do unethical research without taking blame??? Its textbook misdirection, nonprofit and "Open" in the name, hero-esque mission statement. How do you make the mental leap from "we're non-profit and we won't release things too dangerous" to "JK we're for-profit and…
I think it's simply because OpenAI is fundamentally created and controlled by venture capitalists , and the tech they created turned out to be just too juicy an opportunity to not monetize. I can’t say I blame them, when they realize they are sitting on the technological equivalent of a mountain of gold. What would you do?
OpenAI started as a non-profit, went for-profit. Still owned by the big players.... Something isn't right. Is OpenAI just a submarine so the tech giants can do unethical research without taking blame??? Its textbook misdirection, nonprofit and "Open" in the name, hero-esque mission statement. How do you make the mental leap from "we're non-profit and we won't release things too dangerous" to "JK we're for-profit and…
wow you just made the connection for me. GPT2 was too dangerous to release, and now GPT3 is so much better - is there no point at which things become too dangerous anymore? what was the conclusion on that one?