zlacker

Sam wanted to commercialize stuff to shoot for revenue. Ilya wants to keep pushing for gpt 4.5 and beyond, to hell with the revenue. Ilya won the argument, Sam out.

Hell yeah.

It's not safetyism vs accelerationism.

It's commercialization vs innovation.

>>mvkel+(OP)
Commercialization is innovation. Without it they will end up with a cute toy and a bankrupt company.

>>cactus+j7
Eventually, sure. Right now, today, they have a blank check for compute and all the money they could ask for. It's not the time to try to monetize if AGI is the mission. Complete distraction

>>mvkel+(OP)
OpenAI's mission statement is "Creating safe AGI that benefits all of humanity".

How does an LLM App Store advance OpenAI toward this goal? Like, even in floaty general terms? You can make an argument that ChatGPT does (build in public, prepare the world for what's coming, gather training data, etc). You can... maybe... make an argument that their API does... but I think that's a lot harder. The App Store product, that's clearly just Sam on auto-pilot, building products and becoming totally unaligned with the nonprofit's goal.

OpenAI got really good at building products based around LLMs, for B2B enterprise customers who could afford it. This is so far away from the goal that, I hope, Ilya can drive them back toward it.

>>015a+O8
Exactly! Really excited about a realignment back to the mission. I hope Ilya knows what he's doing with so much pressure on him now

>>015a+O8
> OpenAI's mission statement is "Creating safe AGI that benefits all of humanity".

Well an app store let's people... use it.

Look at UNIX. UNIX systems are great. They have produced great benefit to the world. Linux, as the most common Unix-like OS, also does. However, most people do not run any of the academic 'innovative' distros. Most people run the most commercialized version you can possibly think of Android and iOS (Unix variant from Apple). It takes commercializing something to actually make it useful.

>>anon29+Ci
The thing is custom gpts are not useful. They are repackaged system prompts meant for non techy people. They were a distraction from the mission of OpenAI (a non profit). The commercial arm is a capped profit company anyway

>>mvkel+a8
AGI at all costs sounds more terrifying than monetizing ChatGPT. Seems like there could have been a balance to strike.

>>015a+O8
By letting humanity use the thing you made, customized to their own situation, so it can benefit them?

>>fsocie+Un
They are a non-profit specifically founded to build AI, not to become a profitable company and chase revenue

>>mvkel+7m
NVIDIA don't take payment in research papers, unfortunately.

>>disgru+kR
Maybe. But, Microsoft definitely does. Technology and IP was a large piece of their compensation in the 49% acquisition.

>>disgru+kR
Nobody's asking for a loan repayment

>>mvkel+a8
It’s a $10B check with strings attached.

>>015a+vv1
To some extent, yes. They're mostly investing in it to use it's products in their own stuff, so they need models that are useful in the corporate world, not necessarily those models imbued with a deep and abiding love for humanity.