zlacker

Seriously, is there anyone naive enough to have swallowed any of their trips? Corporations don't have ethical compasses, much less corporations founded by VCs aka professional salesmen.

>>andrep+(OP)
Isn't that the point that it wasn't founded as a corporation, nor by Sam Altman?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI#:~:text=The%20organizat....

>>andrep+(OP)
I (parent commenter) may be naive but I actually believe the original intent was probably sincere; I suspect either political shenanigans, greed, gatekeeping or any number of other vices have come rushing with success and shedloads of money, and the original ethical stance was not accompanied by the significant moral courage needed to sustain purity under enormous pressure from either less principled stakeholders, or temptation and ego.

>>atlasu+x2
"Non-profit" refers to the tax-exempt status. "Corporation" is an organizational structure. The designations do not have to overlap but sometimes do. [1] It isn't clear from the wiki page whether it was founded as a corporation or not. The content of the filings are the only way to tell.

[1] https://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-nonprofit...

>>mellos+j5
Seriously, OpenAI is far more open than people talk here. They’ve published all the RLHF protocols, their models are open to use and they are doing more than anyone else on the alignment problem.

It actually feels like all the other projects (including open source ones) seem to be there for short term fame and profits. While it is OpenAI that is playing on the side of long term alignment of AI and humans.

>>mellos+j5
But intention has nothing to do with it!

All of the corrupting forces you listed are foreseeable, even inevitable given a certain corporate structure and position in a market. It is simply bad business, naivete, that made them think they could realistically achieve what they wanted with a company that survives by making money.

Maybe, just maybe, it's not always wise to blindly take people, in positions of power, with much to gain from your believing them, at their word...?

(And if it was true naivete, I don't understand why the consensus isn't "let the company die, a better one will take its place, these people can't run a company" a la the vaunted free market principles that imbue the community of sycophants rooting for Musk et al.)

>>mellos+j5
I guess those billionaires didn't start a foundation for charity purposes.