zlacker

What if OAI's entire research organization follows him? Surely it's one of the best teams working today.

>>alumin+(OP)
It's still tough. They won't have the data used to train the model, which is an incredibly important part. There's a lot of existing competitors in this space with headstarts. There's no guarantee that the entire research organization will follow Sam even if they leave OpenAI - they're going to have a lot of offers and opportunities at other companies that have an advantage.

It's also not clear that this is a realistic scenario - Ilya is the real deal, and there's likely plenty of people that believe in him over Altman.

Of course, the company has also expanded massively under Altman in a more commercial environment, so there are probably quite a few people that believe in Altman over him.

I doubt either side ends up with the entire research organization. I think a very real possibility is both sides end up with less than half of what OpenAI had Friday morning.

>>alumin+(OP)
Why would the entire org follow Sam instead of Ilya?

>>cthalu+Q1
Isn't also because of OpenAI scraping the internet that companies got the walls up. How else is anyone able to gathering training data these days?

>>sudosy+84
Sounds like wishful thinking on the part of the authors source.

If I worked there, I would keep my job and see how things shake out. If I don’t like it, then I start looking. What I don’t do is risk my well being to take sides in a war between people way richer than me.

>>comfys+k6
That makes good sense and I think all those that are not independently wealthy already except personal friends of either Sam or high level remainers are going to do something quite similar. It's just too fluid a situation to make good decisions, especially if your livelihood is at stake, better not to make decisions that can't be easily undone.

>>jacque+eb
Given that the total comp package is $300k base + $600k profit share, I don’t think any of their livelihoods are at stake. >>36460082

You’re probably right because people usually don’t have an appetite for risk, but OpenAI is still a startup, and one does not join a startup without an appetite for risk. At least before ChatGPT made the company famous, which was recent.

I’d follow Sam and Greg. But N=1 outsider isn’t too persuasive.

>>sillys+3e
> I’d follow Sam and Greg.

Once the avalanche has stopped moving that's a free decision, right now it could be costly.

>>wesapi+k4
Generally speaking for a base model this isn't nearly as important as it sounds because the specifics of the data don't matter as long as there's enough of it. You may remember this from high school as the central limit theorem.

For specific things like new words and facts this does matter, but I think they're not in real trouble as long as Wikipedia stays up.

>>cthalu+Q1
thing is they can team with people that probably have that data already. Say Microsoft switches teams to a hypothetical SamCo AI most of the internet has already been indexed by bing and wants to be indexed by bing as its the number 2 search engine. that mean they either have cached or access to pretty much everything SamCo could want to feed said AI. Reddit or Twitter for example would never cut bing off as it would cut off users. Microsoft could though block openai from further access to things like github linkedin.

>>sillys+3e
OpenAI isn’t a normal startup. It was founded as a research focused not for profit. That 300k+ base comp isn’t what I’d consider “risky” either. Career wise it never seemed risky as some of the fields top AI researchers were there from day almost one.