zlacker

>>modele+(OP)
If OpenAI became a non-profit with this in its charter:

“resulting technology will benefit the public and the corporation will seek to open source technology for the public benefit when applicable. The corporation is not organized for the private gain of any person"

I don't think it is going to be hard to show that they are doing something very different than what they said they were going to do.

>>troupe+Kd1
They claim that this is about the end result, but in the meantime, they can license the not-yet-done AI to Microsoft.

>>shp0ng+uQ1
If that's the interpretation, its cpletely open ended and OpenAI has full rights to move goal posts for as long as they wish by redefining "done".

Technologies are never "done" unless and until they are abandoned. Would it be reasonable for OpenAI to only open source once the product is "done" because it is obsolete or failed to meet performance metrics?

And is that open sourcing of the training algorithm, the interpretation engine, or the produced data model?