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

Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–678 of 678 posts

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#671

Post by Dylan16807 »

pc86 wrote: post #667
Dylan16807 wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Standard for who? That's awful model that probably shouldn't be legal. They're already getting a free loan for a service that gets cheaper to provide over time. At most, tokens should expire after years of inactivity and multiple warnings to reset the timer.

"I don't like this thing, so rather than not support that business model the government should make it illegal."

What's your argument? Surely you know that whether that's a reasonable position depends on what "this thing" is.

If "this thing" is a business model that puts money in an account and then makes the money expire, I think it should be illegal just like gift card expiration often is.

There's no reason to prefer consumer pressure against predatory practices. And their business would run just fine without that aspect. It's not important to their overall business model.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#672

Post by lobsterthief »

kandesbunzler wrote: post #599
exprofmaddy wrote: post #176

It seems the humans pursuing AGI lack sufficient natural intelligence. I'm sad that humans with such narrow and misguided perspectives have so much power, money, and influence. I worry this won't end well.

then surely you can create your own company and do it much better than them

Great idea, I’ll just drop everything in my life and do that

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#675

Post by ben_w »

vasco wrote: post #544
tsimionescu wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But nothing will be happening on the planet, except a few rovers, because there is nothing of value whatsoever on Mars that is not literally a thousand times cheaper to find/do on Earth.

Except Mars. Tourism can make a lot of money.

Even his cheapest estimates are still in the $100,000 USD range; I don't think you can support enough tourists to colonise Mars when the ticket alone costs that much.

I can see plenty of people going to Mars — religious groups, cults, anyone who wants to explore the final frontier, the most extreme preppers (which Musk arguably is given his "multi-planetary" arguments), and anyone who would like to build their own mountain-sized space castle.

What I can't figure out what any of those people might sell to Earth such that people on Earth are willing to trade for it, except for information which people on Earth can also produce without paying so much for a ticket.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#676

Post by ben_w »

im3w1l wrote: post #594
ascorbic wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Space is a lot bigger and a lot nearer

Lifting materials into space is very expensive. If you build on a planet (or a moon) then you can mine it for materials reducing the expense.

Our moon is much closer to both us and, importantly for energy sources, the sun; and getting things off our moon can be done with things like SpinLaunch.

SpinLaunch on the moon wouldn't even need the vacuum chamber they use on Earth, but it would still need that on Mars.

The biggest down-side of the moon is the long night, but the solution to that is the same as one possible solution to the lack of magnetosphere on Mars: a very, *very* thick wire.

(I've not done precise calculations for this, but I have considered the scale needed for "thick wire" on an Earth-scale global power grid, and for that I was getting Earth's magnetic field at a distance of 11 km from a 1.36e6 A current, which in turn meant I had a 1m^2 cross section; naturally this is only going to happen if you have some serious automation for processing lunar/martian regolith into aluminium).

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#677

Post by ben_w »

lyu07282 wrote: post #292
bee_rider wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I’m convinced we’re going to screw this planet up, the gap between “as bad as we can make Earth” and “as good as we can make Mars” is pretty huge, right? And not in a way that is optimistic for Mars.

True it's probably easier to survive on earth in some luxury bunker than on Mars no matter how much we destroy earth. Alternative theories: billionaire space tourism, it was never really about mars but about asteroid mining, it was never about mars he just wants the government subsidies

> True it's probably easier to survive on earth in some luxury bunker than on Mars no matter how much we destroy earth.

Definitely, and by a large margin.

If I said Mars combines the warmth of Antarctica with the moisture of the Sahara, the air pressure of the peak of Mount Everest, the environmental quality of a superfund cleanup site, the surface illumination after the 1883 Krakatoa explosion and subsequent volcanic winter, and the UV radiation from a completely destroyed ozone layer…

…if I said all that, I'd be understating how harsh Mars is.

The most positive thing I can say about colonising Mars is that the mere ability to actually do so will mean being able to recover from any possible catastrophe that comes our way.

Re: Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit

#678

Post by ben_w »

iaseiadit wrote: post #405
ShakataGaNai wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When he bought it, sure? Probably more like 20 X's

Offset by the value of toppling a hostile administration that had him in its crosshairs. Is that worth $XXB? Maybe not, but it's worth something.

I'm not sure if X actually caused that, given that even 4 years ago people were suggesting dementia in both Biden and Trump, and that Harris was kinda just parachuted in rapidly and without sufficient preparation when the fear about Biden having dementia got too loud to ignore.

And also that X was never as popular as Facebook.

On the other hand, the polls seemed pretty close, so perhaps it made enough of a difference on the margin.

Post reply on HN