zlacker

[return to "OpenAI is now everything it promised not to be: closed-source and for-profit"]
1. neom+E9[view] [source] 2023-03-01 09:57:52
>>isaacf+(OP)
I find it a little odd that Elon seems to take a swipe at OpenAI any opportunity he gets. If he cares so much about them not making money, maybe he should have put his twitter cash there instead? It's reassuring to me that the two people running policy work at the big AI "startups", Jack Clark (Anthropic) and Miles Brundage (OpenAI, who was hired by Jack iirc), are genuinely good humans. I've known Jack for 10 years and he's for sure a measured and reasonable person who cares about not doing harm. Although I don't know Miles, my understanding is he has similar qualities. If they're gonna be for profit, I feel this is really important.

Edit: Well, I guess these tweets explain the beef well -

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1606642155346612229

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1626516035863212034

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1599291104687374338

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1096987465326374912

◧◩
2. lfkdev+Db[view] [source] 2023-03-01 10:16:51
>>neom+E9
"OpenAI was created as an open source (which is why I named it “Open” AI), non-profit company to serve as a counterweight to Google, but now it has become a closed source, maximum-profit company effectively controlled by Microsoft.

Not what I intended at all." - Elon

You can think what you want of Elon, but he is in the right here.

◧◩◪
3. fundad+hD1[view] [source] 2023-03-01 18:25:11
>>lfkdev+Db
We'd have to believe that he means what he said about starting the company. Maybe he meant it, maybe it was just corporate philanthropy BS. Which do you think is really the case?
◧◩◪◨
4. Eisens+zK2[view] [source] 2023-03-02 00:56:45
>>fundad+hD1
Do we even believe that he was the one who came up with the name?
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. fundad+Xc6[view] [source] 2023-03-03 00:00:15
>>Eisens+zK2
Probably not, I don't believe they ever meant it to be non-commercial.
[go to top]