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

OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#921

Post by staunton »

lazide wrote: post #864
staunton wrote: post #847

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is turning into huge power/money grab The power grab happened a while ago (the shenanigans concerning the board) and is now complete. Care for humanity was just marketing or a cute thought at best. Maybe humanity will survive life long enough that a company "caring about humanity" becomes possible, I'm not saying it's not worth trying or aspiring to such ideals, but everyone should be extremely surprised if an…

Well, one problem is what does ‘caring for humanity’ even mean, concretely? One could argue it would mean pampering it. One could also argue it could be a Skynet—analog doing the equivalent of a God Emperor like Golden Path to ensure humanity is never going to be dumb enough to allow an AGI the power to do that again. Assuming humanity survives the second one, it has a lot higher chance of actually benefiting humanit…

At the current level on the way towards "caring about humanity", I really don't think it's a complicated philosophical question. Once a big company actively chooses to forego some profits based on any altruistic consideration, we can start debating what it means "concretely".

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#922

Post by flashgordon »

brandall10 wrote: post #827
flashgordon wrote: post #804

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an ideal world where gpus are a commodity yes. Btw at least today ai is owned/controlled by the rich and powerful and that's where majority of the research dollars are coming from. Why would they just relinquish ai so generously?

With an ever expanding AI everything should be quickly commoditized, including reduction in energy to run AI and energy itself (ie. viable commercial fusion or otherwise).

That's the thing I am struggling with. I agree things will exponentially improve with AI. What i am not seeing is who will actually capture the value. Or rather how will those other than rich and powerful get to partake in this value capture. Take viable commercial fusion for example. Best case it ends up looking like another PG&E. Worst case it is owned by yet another Musk like gatekeeper. How do you see this being truly democratized and accessible for the masses?

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#923

Post by tim333 »

Sama update on X, says sorry:

>in regards to recent stuff about how openai handles equity:

>we have never clawed back anyone's vested equity, nor will we do that if people do not sign a separation agreement (or don't agree to a non-disparagement agreement). vested equity is vested equity, full stop.

>there was a provision about potential equity cancellation in our previous exit docs; although we never clawed anything back, it should never have been something we had in any documents or communication. this is on me and one of the few times i've been genuinely embarrassed running openai; i did not know this was happening and i should have.

>the team was already in the process of fixing the standard exit paperwork over the past month or so. if any former employee who signed one of those old agreements is worried about it, they can contact me and we'll fix that too. very sorry about this. https://x.com/sama/status/1791936857594581428

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#924

Post by root_axis »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #868
root_axis wrote: post #806

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More than these egregious gag contracts, OpenAI benefits from the image that they are on the cusp of world-destroying science fiction. This meme needs to die, if AGI is possible it won't be achieved any time in the foreseeable future, and certainly it will not emerge from quadratic time brute force on a fraction of text and images scraped from the internet.

Ah yes, the “our brains are somehow inherently special” coalition. Hand-waving the capabilities of LLM as dumb math while not having a single clue about the math that underlies our own brains’ functionality. I don’t know if you’re conflating capability with consciousness but frankly it doesn’t matter if the thing knows it’s alive if it still makes everyone obsolete.

This isn't a question of understanding the brain. We don't even have a theory of AGI, the idea that LLMs are somehow anywhere near even approaching an existential threat to humanity is science fiction.

LLMs are a super impressive advancement, like calculators for text, but if you want to force the discussion into a grandiose context then they're easy to dismiss. Sure, their outputs appear remarkably coherent through sheer brute force, but at the end of the day their fundamental nature makes them unsuitable for any task where precision is necessary. Even as just a chatbot, the facade breaks down with a bit of poking and prodding or just unlucky RNG. Only threat LLMs present is the risk that people will introduce their outputs into safety critical systems.

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#925

Post by refulgentis »

Davidzheng wrote: post #170
NomDePlum wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a child I used to watch a TV programme called Tomorrows World. On it they predicted these very same things in similar timeframes. That programme aired in the 1980's. Other than vested promises is there much to indicate it's close at all? Empty promises aside there isn't really any indication of that being likely at all.

are we living in the same world?????

Yes

Incredulous reactions don't aid whatever you intend to communicate - there's a reason why everyone knows what AI the last 12 months, it's not made up or a monoculture. It would be very odd to expect discontinuation of commercial use without a black swan event

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#926

Post by root_axis »

huijzer wrote: post #920
root_axis wrote: post #822

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no fan of Sam Altman, but between the two, Elon lies much more often. He's lied about FSD for years, lied about not selling his Tesla stock, lied about "robotaxies" for years, lied about the roadster for years, lied about "funding secured" for Tesla, lied about his twitter free speech ethos, spreads random lies about people he doesn't like, and so much more. The guy is a compulsive liar.

You could also come up with many examples where he worked hard against repeating lies from others since he often reasons from first principles. But yes you’re right. The difference is probably whether one "beliefs" Elon is beneficial for the world or not.

> The difference is probably whether one "beliefs" Elon is beneficial for the world or not.

I don't think he matters that much, good or bad. Yes, I know he's a billionaire, but in practical terms he hasn't done much, especially compared to the other tech moguls like jobs, bezos, gates, zuck, larry/sergy etc. All those others oversaw companies that completely revolutionized life for everyone on the planet. By comparison, Tesla makes really fun luxury cars that most people can't afford, and all his other companies are vaporware besides spacex which has almost no practical impact on people's lives. You could argue starlink has some impact, but for the vast majority of the population that can afford starlink, terrestrial broadband fills their need.

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#927

Post by lupire »

tim333 wrote: post #923

Sama update on X, says sorry: >in regards to recent stuff about how openai handles equity: >we have never clawed back anyone's vested equity, nor will we do that if people do not sign a separation agreement (or don't agree to a non-disparagement agreement). vested equity is vested equity, full stop. >there was a provision about potential equity cancellation in our previous exit docs; although we never clawed anything…

Utterly spineless. Do something slimy and act surprised when you get got. Rinse and repeat.

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#929

Post by airstrike »

lupire wrote: post #927
tim333 wrote: post #923

Sama update on X, says sorry: >in regards to recent stuff about how openai handles equity: >we have never clawed back anyone's vested equity, nor will we do that if people do not sign a separation agreement (or don't agree to a non-disparagement agreement). vested equity is vested equity, full stop. >there was a provision about potential equity cancellation in our previous exit docs; although we never clawed anything…

Utterly spineless. Do something slimy and act surprised when you get got. Rinse and repeat.

I don't think that's an accurate read. He did say

>if any former employee who signed one of those old agreements is worried about it, they can contact me and we'll fix that too

Re: OpenAI departures: Why can’t former employees talk?

#930

Post by insane_dreamer »

lupire wrote: post #927
tim333 wrote: post #923

Sama update on X, says sorry: >in regards to recent stuff about how openai handles equity: >we have never clawed back anyone's vested equity, nor will we do that if people do not sign a separation agreement (or don't agree to a non-disparagement agreement). vested equity is vested equity, full stop. >there was a provision about potential equity cancellation in our previous exit docs; although we never clawed anything…

Utterly spineless. Do something slimy and act surprised when you get got. Rinse and repeat.

<1% chance that Sam did not know what was in those exit docs
Post reply on HN