3 ms·

Is anyone else troubled by them not releasing the source model/dataset/parameters here? Yes, the technology can be used for malicious means - but would argue th

Is anyone else troubled by them not releasing the source model/dataset/parameters here? Yes, the technology can be used for malicious means - but would argue that "DeepFaking" language is FAR less of a problem than "DeepFaking" video/photo/audio... which already occurs. Seems like they went back on their charter to share AI developments broadly ("not concentrate power") under the excuse of "safety." (These results look fire btw) Note: copied my comment from dupe thread

ipsum2 8y ago
I agree with this. OpenAI isn't particularly 'open', compared to other AI research organizations (Notable ones that open source almost all their work are AllenAI and FAIR, but I'm sure there are others). Wonder what their excuse is for not releasing the source model or code for their DoTA bot. Surely there's no safety issues there?
_Microft 8y ago
Quote from their charter [0]: Today this includes publishing most of our AI research, but we expect that safety and security concerns will reduce our traditional publishing in the future, while increasing the importance of sharing safety, policy, and standards research. They referenced that from the article you commented on in the section 'release strategy' [1]: [...] we see this current work as potentially representing the early beginnings of such concerns, which we expect may grow over time. This decision, as well as our discussion of it, is an experiment: while we are not sure that it is the right decision today, we believe that the AI community will eventually need to tackle the issue of publication norms in a thoughtful way in certain research areas. Other disciplines such as biotechnology and cybersecurity have long had active debates about responsible publication in cases with clear misuse potential, and we hope that our experiment will serve as a case study for more nuanced discussions of model and code release decisions in the AI community. [0] https://blog.openai.com/openai-charter/ https://blog.openai.com/openai-charter/ [1] https://blog.openai.com/better-language-models/#releasestrategy https://blog.openai.com/better-language-models/#releasestrat...

ipsum2 8y ago

I agree with this. OpenAI isn't particularly 'open', compared to other AI research organizations (Notable ones that open source almost all their work are AllenAI and FAIR, but I'm sure there are others). Wonder what their excuse is for not releasing the source model or code for their DoTA bot. Surely there's no safety issues there?

_Microft 8y ago

Quote from their charter [0]: Today this includes publishing most of our AI research, but we expect that safety and security concerns will reduce our traditional publishing in the future, while increasing the importance of sharing safety, policy, and standards research. They referenced that from the article you commented on in the section 'release strategy' [1]: [...] we see this current work as potentially representing the early beginnings of such concerns, which we expect may grow over time. This decision, as well as our discussion of it, is an experiment: while we are not sure that it is the right decision today, we believe that the AI community will eventually need to tackle the issue of publication norms in a thoughtful way in certain research areas. Other disciplines such as biotechnology and cybersecurity have long had active debates about responsible publication in cases with clear misuse potential, and we hope that our experiment will serve as a case study for more nuanced discussions of model and code release decisions in the AI community. [0] https://blog.openai.com/openai-charter/ https://blog.openai.com/openai-charter/ [1] https://blog.openai.com/better-language-models/#releasestrategy https://blog.openai.com/better-language-models/#releasestrat...