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
yeah, the lawyers will have the whole case on those two words: "where applicable"

>>cpill+4i1
Yep - the very existence of a widespread concern that open sourcing would be counter to AI safety, and thus not "for the public benefit," would likely it very hard to find OpenAI in violation of that commitment. (Not a lawyer, not legal advice.)

>>btown+Zs1
Given there have is a thriving open source AI scene, not sure how it would stand.

>>BiteCo+jG1
Yeah but has that community grown because of OpenAI, or in spite of it.

IMO the only real involvement OpenAI has had in that movement is suddenly getting REAL hand-wringy Infront of Congress about how dangerous AI is the moment OpenAI no longer held the only set of keys to the kingdom.