5 ms·
This is troubling in the context of OpenAI deciding not to release their code and dataset for fear of it being put to bad use. It's a tricky topic but I get ner
by alexcnwy 8y ago
This is troubling in the context of OpenAI deciding not to release their code and dataset for fear of it being put to bad use. It's a tricky topic but I get nervous at the idea of research being censored.
- darawk 8y agoOpenAI doing this was just to get attention. Any funded entity could trivially reproduce their work. There is no way this was done out of any serious, principled fear of bad actors getting their hands on it.
- jobigoud 8y agoBut if they publish the pretrained model then not just funded entities can reproduce their work, but essentially any person that can type `pip install tensorflow` or whatever. That's pretty big reach difference. Although, probably only a few months timewise.
- darawk 8y agoYa, but 'pip install tensorflow' is about as hard as reproducing the work from their paper too. Anyone with a CS degree should be able to do it with a bit of effort. I agree that that is still a reach difference, but I think it's kind of negligible here.
- robsont 8y agoI think you are vastly underestimating the difficulty of achieving those result.
- darawk 8y agoI don't think so. They published a paper describing their methods. I've implemented techniques from papers like these before, it's not that hard. What they're doing doesn't seem especially complicated to me.
- pizza 8y agoWe will get better protections against deepfakes etc. at a much slower rate if we limit their public visibility. We need better counter-tools. Human ingenuity will not be contained like this. I'm almost certain that somewhere between 10-100 people who saw the OpenAI censored release saw it as a challenge for them to recreate it on their own. This is fine. Maybe this makes things significantly more chaotic in the short term. But we have to take the long view on this. Ten years from now this tech will be seen as a joke compared to whatever they will have. It's time to start preparing for that.
- xiphias2 8y agoThat was very strange for me as well, as the original stated goal of OpenAI was to decentralize power. It looks like instead of that they just want to be one more of the few powerful entities.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- pishpash 8y agoAre you surprised? It's too tempting.
- proy24 8y agoEvery utopian dream must end in power grabs. True of communism in the 70s and true in tech now.
- p1esk 8y ago70s? Was it ever different?
- dave_sullivan 8y agoAlas OpenAI is just centralized R&D for Musk's different companies. Case in point: they're holding back the code and datasets out of "concern for public safety", but do Musk's companies get access?
- MarcysVonEylau 8y agoI like your bubble...
- Isinlor 8y agoHe left OpenAI a year ago. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-17/elon-musk-left-openai-on-disagreements-about-company-pathway https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-17/elon-musk...
- 8y ago
- ekianjo 8y agoespecially for an organization calling itself "Open"something.
- ISO-morphism 8y agoMost start with good intentions. After realizing the power/advantage they have, whether it be from advanced technology, political office, or other position, they become jealous of it and find moral justification for clinging onto it despite conflict with their original intention. There's probably a word for this sentiment that I'm not aware of.
- slaymaker1907 8y agoAs a grad student, my trust that they actually did what they said they did is 0. If you don’t publish your source code without a damned good reason (i.e. your legal department says you are not allowed to), your publication is near worthless in non-theory CS since it is very likely to be unreproducible and probably has bugs which render the conclusions invalid.