4 ms·

to play angel’s advocate, could this arrangement reflect a desire to remain dedicated to research and actually present the wisest trade-off for openai to contin

to play angel’s advocate, could this arrangement reflect a desire to remain dedicated to research and actually present the wisest trade-off for openai to continue innovating? there are annoying and distracting challenges to operating a large-scale and commercial API, none of which directly advance the openai vision. openai at its core is a research organization. while it obviously has the talent to build groups for customer support, billing, and API operations, outsourcing these activities for now also allows openai to stay laser focused on groundbreaking research. this hypothesis would be false if microsoft, not openai, controlled the terms of the relationship. the key assumption is that openai wields virtually all decision-making power, and that microsoft is more like a distributor of technology rather than a steward.

panabee 6y ago
to provide a concrete example, openai severely gated the number of beta users for GPT-3. by partnering with microsoft, hopefully they can throw open the floodgates and allow most everyone in. for instance, i applied 3 weeks ago and still haven't heard back. (could anyone from openai kindly share an available invite?)
dumbfoundded 6y ago
Then why an exclusive license with Microsoft? If OpenAI had all the power, you'd think they license it out to several major cloud providers and just give the first license holders better pricing.
- panabee 6y ago
  i have no openai insight, so treat this as idle speculation please. supporting partners properly requires a lot of work, especially since openai clearly wants to monitor usage and curtail toxic applications. starting with one makes sense, and if you intend to start with one, why not charge for the right? if we don’t want openai to degrade, it must control its own destiny and create healthy, sustainable revenue streams. having the foresight to charge one of the richest corporations for exclusivity should increase confidence that openai has ample business talent as well as technical. this hypothesis is false if openai doesn’t offer GPT-3 to other partners within a reasonable timeframe.
  - dumbfoundded 6y ago
    The license is exclusive (1). I think of a GPT-4 is planned and about a year out so I don't know if Microsoft's license will apply to future GPT-X models. For GPT-3 though, it seems like they were offered enough money and didn't want to deal with the hassle of supporting customers or their mission. (1) https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2020/09/22/microsoft-teams-up-with-openai-to-exclusively-license-gpt-3-language-model/ https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2020/09/22/microsoft-teams-...
    - panabee 6y ago
      taking a step back, openai is rightly concerned about potential abuse of gpt-3 and must also find a way to create sustainable, healthy revenue streams. think of openai's work in three large buckets: (1) groundbreaking research; (2) preventing gpt-3 abuse; and (3) laying the foundation for an independent future. put another way, there's a stark difference between doing research and commercializing research. openai must do both while carrying the additional burden of preventing abuse. the angel's interpretation is that openai is outsourcing non-research, non-core activities to microsoft similar to how a developer might outsource customer sales and support to a MBA grad. this frees more attention and resources for research. let's hope this is true, though i can understand many of the cynical viewpoints.
- abraae 6y ago
  Licences usually have an end date. OpenAI might have got more money from a single customer than by splitting it among several. And they can always go back to the trough once the licence expires.

panabee 6y ago

to provide a concrete example, openai severely gated the number of beta users for GPT-3. by partnering with microsoft, hopefully they can throw open the floodgates and allow most everyone in. for instance, i applied 3 weeks ago and still haven't heard back. (could anyone from openai kindly share an available invite?)

dumbfoundded 6y ago

Then why an exclusive license with Microsoft? If OpenAI had all the power, you'd think they license it out to several major cloud providers and just give the first license holders better pricing.

panabee 6y ago
i have no openai insight, so treat this as idle speculation please. supporting partners properly requires a lot of work, especially since openai clearly wants to monitor usage and curtail toxic applications. starting with one makes sense, and if you intend to start with one, why not charge for the right? if we don’t want openai to degrade, it must control its own destiny and create healthy, sustainable revenue streams. having the foresight to charge one of the richest corporations for exclusivity should increase confidence that openai has ample business talent as well as technical. this hypothesis is false if openai doesn’t offer GPT-3 to other partners within a reasonable timeframe.
- dumbfoundded 6y ago
  The license is exclusive (1). I think of a GPT-4 is planned and about a year out so I don't know if Microsoft's license will apply to future GPT-X models. For GPT-3 though, it seems like they were offered enough money and didn't want to deal with the hassle of supporting customers or their mission. (1) https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2020/09/22/microsoft-teams-up-with-openai-to-exclusively-license-gpt-3-language-model/ https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2020/09/22/microsoft-teams-...
  - panabee 6y ago
    taking a step back, openai is rightly concerned about potential abuse of gpt-3 and must also find a way to create sustainable, healthy revenue streams. think of openai's work in three large buckets: (1) groundbreaking research; (2) preventing gpt-3 abuse; and (3) laying the foundation for an independent future. put another way, there's a stark difference between doing research and commercializing research. openai must do both while carrying the additional burden of preventing abuse. the angel's interpretation is that openai is outsourcing non-research, non-core activities to microsoft similar to how a developer might outsource customer sales and support to a MBA grad. this frees more attention and resources for research. let's hope this is true, though i can understand many of the cynical viewpoints.
abraae 6y ago
Licences usually have an end date. OpenAI might have got more money from a single customer than by splitting it among several. And they can always go back to the trough once the licence expires.