zlacker

>>modele+(OP)
There is a lot in here but turning a non-profit into a for-profit definitely should be challenged. Otherwise why wouldn't everyone start as a non-profit, develop your IP, and then switch to 'for-profit' mode once you got something that works? You don't pay income taxes and your investors get write offs.

>>silico+z11
This. Even when we ignore the whole ethical aspect of "AI for benefit of humanity" and all that philosophic stuff, there are very real legal reasons why OpenAI should never have been allowed to switch to for profit. They were only able to circumvent this with their new dual company structure, but this should still not be legal.

>>sigmoi+i31
Imagine if as punishment, OpenAI were forced to OpenSource any and all IP that was developed in the non-profit phase of their company?

That would be a Nuke in the AI world.

>>samsta+d61
Not really. Open source and proprietary models aren't that far from them.

They don't have moat. Their main advantage have been people and aleady we see entire Anthropic spinoff, Sutskever absent, Karpathy leave, who is next?

>>option+881
Their main advantage are their products and their communication. ChatGPT is nice and they managed to impose their API.

Open source staying behind commercial products even if they are technically really close … ? I think I have already seen this.