zlacker

If you bought into the idea that OpenAI was developing advanced ML/AI technology as a public utility, isn't that a bit on you? They don't actually owe anybody anything, and never have, so (a) the time to really hammer them on this stuff was a decade ago and (b) they didn't actually take anything from the public to do this, so even a decade ago they could have said "ok whatever" and gotten on with their day.

It would be different, maybe, if everybody else in the industry stood aside and let OpenAI monopolize development of transformer-style-AI (or whatever it is we're calling this) for the common good. But nobody did that; the opposite thing happened. This space has been a Gem Saloon knife fight just waiting to pop off for the entirety of OpenAI's existance.

>>tptace+(OP)
I'm not completely convinced OpenAI is not a public good. I've started using it at my company, we found literally millions in value... and it cost us about $60 in tokens.

>>swalsh+r
It's a company, with a good product. I like Lao Gan Ma chili crisp way out of proportion to what it costs me, but they're still just a firm. :)

>>swalsh+r
How did you quantify millions?

>>swalsh+r
That you find value in the product doesn't make them a public good. OpenAI is in it for the money, not for some "public good".

>>brcmth+l1
We used the AI to help us find gaps which were being incorrectly billed. So we could just measure the incorrectly billed dollars directly.

>>swalsh+r
Can’t you say this about literally anything you consume?

How is this different than, “I read a scientific paper, and unlocked millions of dollars of value, and all it cost was $250 for 8 pages of text. So I guess Axel-Springer is a public good.”?

Just buying and selling something doesn’t make it a public good. Valuable sure, but selling something for a profit makes it by definition not a public good.

>>swalsh+p5
Hopefully you then confirmed that these issues actually existing using another method,

Relying on a system to say that you are not charging correctly sounds rather like UK's Post Office Horizon system and we know that ChatGPT will hallucinate things,

>>tptace+(OP)
OpenAI promised in their IRS statements to provide documentation on their operations. So they owe the public something, and now they reneged on their promise.

This article is just pointing out that OpenAI went back on their promises of financial transparency.

>>warkda+3a
What favorable tax treatment has OpenAI received?

>>tptace+(OP)
> They don't actually owe anybody anything

non-profits in most countries have to be operating to produce some form of public benefit

is this not true in the US?

>>tptace+(OP)
they are literally called... wait for it... OPEN-AI

not closedAI

>>tptace+Zg
They were founded as a non-profit; https://openai.com/our-structure.

>>wewtyf+DD
Right, but the operating organization wasn't.

>>swalsh+p5
Your organization sounds like amateur hour, no offence

>>tptace+(OP)
We all owe everyone a lot. 99% of what OpenAI - or anyone - has was provided by someone else, from technology (the entire history of computer technology), to science, to infrastructure, an educational system that produces employees, a legal system, financial system, economy, even language, etc. etc. etc.

Our communities don't work on their own; they don't work only by government action; it takes all of us. When we forget that, our communities fall apart, if you haven't noticed yet.

>>brcmth+6S
What would you reccomend?