zlacker

>>apsec1+(OP)
I have a hard time believing this simply since it seems so ill-conceived. Sure, maybe Sam Altman was being irresponsible and taking risks, but they had an insanely good thing going for them. I'm not saying Sam Altman was responsible for the good times they were having, but you're probably going to bring them to an end by abruptly firing one of the most prominent members of the group, seeing where individual loyalties lie, and pissing off Microsoft by tanking their stock price without giving them any heads up.

I mean, none of this would be possible without insane amounts of capital and world class talent, and they probably just made it a lot harder to acquire both.

But what do I know? If you can convince yourself that you're actually building AGI by making an insanely large LLM, then you can also probably convince yourself of a lot of other dumb ideas too.

>>Bjorkb+87
Tbh this reads a lot like Ilya thinking he’s Tony Stark and his (still impressive) language model is somehow the same as an iron man suit. Which is arrogance to the point of ignorance, reality isn’t that romantic.

I can only hope this doesn’t turn into OpenAI trying to gatekeep multimodal models or conversely everyone else leaving them in the dust.

>>cuuupi+J9
you seem to have confused the two. Sam’s entire reason for being there was to decrease transparency, make open research proprietary, and monetize it.

>>Cacti+8d
Don’t forget regulatory capture, lobbying with congress to decrease competition so only the deepest pockets can work on these things.