zlacker

>>nickth+(OP)
If you bought into the idea that OpenAI was developing advanced ML/AI technology as a public utility, isn't that a bit on you? They don't actually owe anybody anything, and never have, so (a) the time to really hammer them on this stuff was a decade ago and (b) they didn't actually take anything from the public to do this, so even a decade ago they could have said "ok whatever" and gotten on with their day.

It would be different, maybe, if everybody else in the industry stood aside and let OpenAI monopolize development of transformer-style-AI (or whatever it is we're calling this) for the common good. But nobody did that; the opposite thing happened. This space has been a Gem Saloon knife fight just waiting to pop off for the entirety of OpenAI's existance.

>>tptace+S5
I'm not completely convinced OpenAI is not a public good. I've started using it at my company, we found literally millions in value... and it cost us about $60 in tokens.

>>swalsh+j6
Can’t you say this about literally anything you consume?

How is this different than, “I read a scientific paper, and unlocked millions of dollars of value, and all it cost was $250 for 8 pages of text. So I guess Axel-Springer is a public good.”?

Just buying and selling something doesn’t make it a public good. Valuable sure, but selling something for a profit makes it by definition not a public good.