zlacker

[return to "OpenAI staff threaten to quit unless board resigns"]
1. joshst+ri[view] [source] 2023-11-20 14:44:56
>>skille+(OP)
Well I give up. I think everyone is a "loser" in the current situation. With Ilya signing this I have literally no clue what to believe anymore. I was willing to give the board the benefit of the doubt since I figured non-profit > profit in terms of standing on principal but this timeline is so screwy I'm done.

Ilya votes for and stands behind decision to remove Altman, Altman goes to MS, other employees want him back or want to join him at MS and Ilya is one of them, just madness.

◧◩
2. Jeremy+vp[view] [source] 2023-11-20 15:26:19
>>joshst+ri
There's no way to read any of this other than that the entire operation is a clown show.

All respect to the engineers and their technical abilities, but this organization has demonstrated such a level of dysfunction that there can't be any path back for it.

Say MS gets what it wants out of this move, what purpose is there in keeping OpenAI around? Wouldn't they be better off just hiring everybody? Is it just some kind of accounting benefit to maintain the weird structure / partnership, versus doing everything themselves? Because it sure looks like OpenAI has succeeded despite its leadership and not because of it, and the "brand" is absolutely and irrevocably tainted by this situation regardless of the outcome.

◧◩◪
3. dkjaud+fZ[view] [source] 2023-11-20 18:01:01
>>Jeremy+vp
> There's no way to read any of this other than that the entire operation is a clown show.

In that reading Altman is head clown. Everyone is blaming the board, but you're no genius if you can't manage your board effectively. As CEO you have to bring everyone along with your vision; customers, employees and the board.

◧◩◪◨
4. topspi+W61[view] [source] 2023-11-20 18:28:52
>>dkjaud+fZ
> In that reading Altman is head clown.

That's a good bet. 10 months ago Microsoft's newest star employee figured he was on the way to "break capitalism."

https://futurism.com/the-byte/openai-ceo-agi-break-capitalis...

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. dkjaud+P91[view] [source] 2023-11-20 18:38:41
>>topspi+W61
AGI hype is a powerful hallucinogen, and some are smoking way too much of it.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. 93po+7r1[view] [source] 2023-11-20 19:42:38
>>dkjaud+P91
I think it’s overly simplistic to make blanket statements like this unless you’re on the bleeding edge of the work in this industry and have some sort of insight that literally no one else does.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. dkjaud+Qv1[view] [source] 2023-11-20 20:00:19
>>93po+7r1
I can be on the bleeding edge of whatever you like and be no closer to having any insight into AGI anymore than anyone else. Anyone who claims they have should be treated with suspicion (Altman is a fine example here).

There is no concrete definition of intelligence, let alone AGI. It's a nerdy fantasy term, a hallowed (and feared!) goal with a very handwavy, circular definition. Right now it's 100% hype.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. coder-+Xb2[view] [source] 2023-11-20 23:11:46
>>dkjaud+Qv1
You don't think AGI is feasible? GPT is already useful. Scaling reliably and predictably yields increases in capabilities. As its capabilities increase it becomes more general. Multimodal models and the use of tools further increase generality. And that's within the current transformer architecture paradigm; once we start reasonably speculating, there're a lot of avenues to further increase capabilities e.g. a better architecture over transformers, better architecture in general, better/more GPUs, better/more data etc. Even if capabilities plateau there are other options like specialised fine-tuned models for particular domains like medicine/law/education.

I find it harder to imagine a future where AGI (even if it's not superintelligent) does not have a huge and fundamental impact.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. NemoNo+Bx2[view] [source] 2023-11-21 01:34:38
>>coder-+Xb2
It's not about feasibility or level of intelligence per say - I expect AI to be able to pass a turing test long before an AI actually "wakes up" to a level of intelligence that establishes an actual conscious self identity comparable to a human.

For all intents and purposes the glorified software of the near future will appear to be people but they will not be and they will continue to have issues that simply don't make sense unless they were just really good at acting - the article today about the AI that can fix logic errors but not "see" them is a perfect example.

This isn't the generation that would wake up anyway. We are seeing the creation of the worker class of AI, the manager class, the AI made to manage AI - they may have better chances but it's likely going to be the next generation before we need to be concerned or can actually expect a true AGI but again - even an AI capable of original and innovative thinking with an appearance of self identity doesn't guarantee that the AI is an AGI.

I'm not sure we could ever truly know for certain

[go to top]