zlacker

AFAICT Sam and his financial objectives was the reason for not open sourcing the work of a non profit.. He might be wishing he chose the other policy now that he can't legally just take the closed source with him to an unambiguously for profit company.

Personally, I would expect a lot more development of GPT-4+ as soon as this is split up from one closed group making gpt-5 in secret and it seems silly to exchange a reliable future for another few months of depending on this little shell game.

>>potato+(OP)
The architect of the coup (Ilya) is strongly opposed to open-sourcing OpenAI's models due to safety concerns. This will not - and would not - be any different without Sam. The decision to close the models was made over 2 years before the release of ChatGPT and long before anyone really suspected this would be an insanely valuable company, so I do believe that safety actually was the initial reason for this change.

I'm not sure what you mean by your second paragraph.

>>skwirl+E2
I think the closed source for safety thing started as a ruse as the closed source has been instrumental to keeping control and justifying a non profit that is otherwise not working in the public interest. Splitting off this ruse nonprofit would almost certainly end up unleashing the tech normally like every other tech google, etc, have easily copied.