771–780 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s a bit tragic that Ilya and company achieved the exact opposite of what they intended apparently, by driving those they attempted to slow down into the arms of people with more money and less morals. Well. If they didn’t fire him, Altman will just continue to run hog wild over their charter. In that sense they lose either way. At least this way, OpenAI can continue to operate independently instead of being Micr…
Moloch always wins.
I don’t quite buy your Cyberpunk utopia where the Megacorp finally rids us of those pesky ethics qualms (or ”shackles“, as you phrased it.) Microsoft can now proceed without the guidance of a council that actually has humanities interests in mind, not only those of Microsoft shareholders. I don’t know whether all that caution will turn out to have been necessary, but I guess we’re just gleefully heading into whatever…
The idea that OpenAI people whose focus is building an AGI that can replace humans in every viable human activity will create a more ethical outcome than Microsoft whose focus is using AI to empower workers to do more sounds extremely unlikely. People have gotten into their heads that researchers are good and corporations are bad in every case which is simply not true. OpenAI's mission is worse for humanity than Micr…
If Microsoft came up with a way of making trillion dollars in profit by enslaving half the planet, it kinda has to do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't Microsoft in breach of contract here? Not by the word (parties hadn't forseen such event, and so there won't be anything about this explicity in the contract). But one could argue that MS isn't acting in good faith and acting counter to the purpose of the agreement with OpenAI. The argument would go something like this: MS were contractually obliged to assist OpenAI in their mission. OpenAI fired Altman for wha…
> MS is positioning itself as an opponent to OpenAI They were positioned that way by the OpenAI board, which has effectively committed corporate suicide and won’t be around much longer.
the bottleneck right now is mostly compute I think, and openai does not have the resources or expertise to allieviate that bottleneck on a timescale that can save them.
Have to give it to Satya. There's a thin possibility that Microsoft would have to write-off its whole $10B (or more?) investment in OpenAI, but that isn't Satya's focus. The focus is on what he can do next. Maybe, recruit the most formidable AI team in the world, removed from the shackles of an awkward non-profit owning a for-profit company? Give enough (cash) incentives and most of OpenAI employees would have no qua…
> There's a thin possibility that Microsoft would have to write-off its whole $10B (or more?) investment in OpenAI How so? I don't get the hype. OpenAI trained truly ground breaking models that were miles ahead of anything the world had seen before. Everything else was really just a side show. Their marketing efforts were, at best, average. They called their flagship product "ChatGPT", a term that might resonate with…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might notice that Microsoft shareholders are also part of humanity and destroying humanity would be highly detrimental to Microsoft's profits, so maybe their interests are not as misaligned as you think. I am always bemused by how people assume any corporate interest is automatically a cartoon supervillain who wants to destroy the entire world just because.
The mega rich have been building bunkers and preparing for the downfall of humanity for a long time now. Look around and you'll notice that greed wins out over everything else. We're surrounded by companies doing nothing or only small token gestures to protect humanity or the world we live in and instead focusing on getting rich, because getting rich is exactly why people become shareholders. Don't rely on those guys…
Have to give it to Satya. There's a thin possibility that Microsoft would have to write-off its whole $10B (or more?) investment in OpenAI, but that isn't Satya's focus. The focus is on what he can do next. Maybe, recruit the most formidable AI team in the world, removed from the shackles of an awkward non-profit owning a for-profit company? Give enough (cash) incentives and most of OpenAI employees would have no qua…
What choice did Satya have? Nothing much else he could have done in the present situation.
Now they get 40 percent of open ai talent and 50 percent of the for profit openai subsidiary.
Pretty sure when the market opens you'll see confirmation that they came out on top.
It's a win for everyone honestly. Anthropic split all over again but this time the progressives got pushed out vs the conservatives leaving voluntarily.
They couldn't keep nice under the tent. Now two tents.
Little diff because this time an investor with special privaleges made a new special tent quick to bag talent.
Easy decision for msft. No talent to competitors. Small talent pool. The other big boys were already all over that. Salty bosses at other outfits. No poach for them. Satya too clever and brought the checkbook plus already courted the cutest girls earlier for a different dance. Hell he was assisting in the negotiation when the old dance got all rough and the jets started throwing hooks about safety and scale and bla bla we all know the story.
Satya hunts with an elephant gun with one of those laser sites and the auto trigger that fires automatically when the cross hair goes over the target. Rip sundar. 2 rounds for satya. One more and I feel bad for Google... Naw... Couldn't feel bad for Google. Punchable outfit. They do punchable things. We all know it... I'm just saying it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had hoped nobody read cyberpunk books and thought that was a description of utopia but consistently we see billionaires trying to act out the sci-fi novels from their youth or impose dystopian world views from Ayn Rand.
Eh, so far they have nothing on the people trying to act out utopias in the 20th century. I will wake up when the billionaire Zeitgeist goes past resource allocation and into "cleanse the undesirables".
Interesting to note how much of this is driven by individual billionaire humans being hung up on stuff like ketamine. I'm given to understand numerous high-ranking Nazis were hung up on amphetamines. Humans like to try and make themselves into deities, by basically hitting themselves in the brain with rocks.
Doesn't end well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ilya should just go to Anthropic AI at this point. They have better momentum at this point after all this, and share his ideals. But it would be funny because they broke off of OpenAI because of their Microsoft ventures already in 2019, haha. He'd be welcomed with a big "We told you so!"
I don't consider Anthropic's approach to safety fantastic. They train the model to lie, play cat and mouse with jailbreakers, run moderation on generations with delay etc. This makes the model appear safer, as it's harder to jailbreak, but this approach solves nothing fundamentally. If Ilya is concerned about safety and alignment, he probably has a better chance to get there with OpenAI, now the he has more control o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not claiming how right or wrong the final outcome would be, but owning the technology with a clear "for-profit" objective is definitely a better structure for Microsoft and for Sam Altman as well (considering, his plans for the future). I have no opinion on AI risk. I just think that a super valuable technology under a non-profit objective was simply an untenable structure, regardless of potential threats.
It isn't fear of a sentient AI that enslaves humanity that makes me disappointed with for-profit companies getting a stronger grip on this tech. It is the fear that a greater portion of the value of this technology will go to the stockholders of said companies rather than potentially be shared among a larger percentage of society. Not that I had that much faith in OpenAI, but in general the shift from non-profit to f…
You know what is an even bigger temptation to people than money - power. And being a high priest for some “god” controlling access from the unwashed masses who might use it for “bad” is a really heady dose of power.
This safety argument was used to justify monarchy, illiteracy, religious coercion.
There is a much greater chance of AI getting locked away from normal people by a non-profit on a power trip, rather than by a corporation looking to maximize profit.