zlacker

>>vforgi+(OP)
Is this just to put up a barrier to entry to new entrants in the market so they can have a government enforced monopoly?

>>simonb+jS
Why would OpenAI be worried about new entrants that are almost certainly too small to present a business threat?

What regulation are they proposing that is actually a serious barrier to making a company around AI?

If OpenAI just wants to prevent another OpenAI eating its lunch, the barrier there is raw compute. Companies that can afford that can afford to jump regulatory hurdles.

>>vsaret+s61
> If OpenAI just wants to prevent another OpenAI eating its lunch, the barrier there is raw compute.

FB, Amazon, Google (and possibly Apple) can afford both money and compute resource for that. They couldn't do that themselves probably due to corporate politics and bureaucratic but MS and OpenAI showed how to solve that problem. They definitely don't want their competitors to copy the strategy so they're blatantly asking for explicit whitelisting instead of typical safety regulation.

And note that AI compute efficiency is a rapidly developing area and OpenAI definitely knows the formula won't be left the same in the coming years. Expect LLM to be 10x efficient than the SOTA in the foreseeable future, which probably will make it economical even without big tech's backing.