zlacker

>>medler+(OP)
If Altman gets to return, it’s the goodbye of AI ethics within OpenAI and the elimination of the nonprofit. Also, I believe that hiring him back because of “how much he is loved by people within OpenAI” is like forgetting that a corrupt president did what they did. In all honesty, that has precedent, so it wouldn’t be old news. Also, I read a lot of people here saying this is about engineers vs scientists…I believe that people don’t understand that Data Scientists are full stack engineers. Ilya is one. Greg has just been inspiring people and stopped properly coding with the team a long time ago. Sam never did any code and the vision of an AGI comes from Ilya…Even if Mira now sides with Sam, I believe there’s a lot of social pressure for the employees to support Sam and it shouldn’t be like that. Again, I do believe OpenAI was and is a collective effort. But, I wouldn’t treat Sam as the messiah or compare him to Steve Jobs. That’s indecent towards Steve Jobs who was actually a UX designer.

>>mariaa+Xf1
Like it or not, some people compare him to Jobs http://www.paulgraham.com/5founders.html

>>nerber+si1
This is the problem with people: they build icons to worship and turn a blind eye to the crooked side of that icon. Both Jobs and Altman are significant as businessmen and have accomplished a lot, but neither did squat for the technical part of the business. Right now, Altman is irrelevant for the further development of AI and GPT in particular because the vision for the AI future comes from the engineers and scientists of OpenAI. Apple has never had any equipment that is good enough and comparable in price/performance to its market counterparts. The usability of iOS is so horrible that I just can't understand how people decide to use iPhones and eat glass for the sake of the brand. GPT-4 and GPT-4 Turbo are totally different. They are the best, but they are not irreplaceable. If you look at what Phind did to LLaMA-2, you'll say it is very competitive. Though LLaMA-2 requires some additional hidden layers to further close the gap. Making LLaMA-2 175B or larger is just a matter of finances. That said, Altman is not vital for OpenAI anymore. Preventing Altman from creating a dystopian future is a much more responsible task that OpenAI can undertake.

>>pk-pro+Bm1
Ecosystem around chat GPT is the differentiator that Meta and Mistral can’t beat – so I’d say that Altman is more relevant today than ever. And, for example, if you’ve read Mistral’s paper – I think you would agree that it’s straightforward to replicate similar results for every other major player. Replicating ecosystem is much harder.

Performance is never a complete product – neither for Apple, nor for Open AI (its for-profit part).

>>ohcmon+rz1
If you really need such an ecosystem, then you can build one right away, like Kagi Labs and Phind did. In the case of Kagi, no GPT is involved; in the case of Phind, GPT-4 is still vital, but they are closing the gap with their cheaper and faster LLaMA-2 34B-based models.

> Performance is never a complete product

In the case of GPT-4, performance - in terms of the quality of generation and speed - is the vital aspect that still holds competitors back.

Google, Microsoft, Meta, and countless research teams and individual researchers are actually responsible for the success of OpenAI, and this should remain a collective effort. What OpenAI is doing now by hiding details of their models is actually wrong. They stand on the shoulders of giants but refuse to share these days, and Altman is responsible for this.

Let us not forget what OpenAI was declared to stand for.