3 ms·

Gives me very low confidence that these people understand society at all. And they’re supposed to be the gatekeepers? According to… themselves I’m guessing? Ah

Gives me very low confidence that these people understand society at all. And they’re supposed to be the gatekeepers? According to… themselves I’m guessing? Ah yes a pompous letter where we list all of our impressive formal accomplishments will surely get these rubes to take their hands off of our toys

selfhoster11 4y ago
The only reason they are the gatekeepers, is because they are the ones with all the GPUs. OpenAI seems to be counting on that as their moat vs all the plebs who want to use GPT-3 for "unapproved" purposes, at least.
- w4ffl35 4y ago
  I think they will try to ban us from the technology, or force us to be registered to use it on their system under supervision. my guess is that the future will involve thumb-printing these models in some way to determine where they came from and who developed them.
  - selfhoster11 4y ago
    Good luck. This will take the ban on unlicensed general-purpose computation - which incidentally, has more and more pieces dropping into place thanks to the wonders of DRM.
    - w4ffl35 4y ago
      true, these people circumvent law, not play by it. But clearly they do their best to wall us off and push us towards the registered paid model that I mentioned.
    - paskozdilar 4y ago
      Good thing we have FSF and EFF on our side. Not to mention RMS.
      - aaaaaaaaaaab 4y ago
        RMS? They simply canceled the guy a few years ago…
        paskozdilar 4y ago
        RMS is back in FSF, and as far as I know, nothing has changed. The "cancellation" attempt was a good try, though. Really made me worried.
        selfhoster11 4y ago
        IMO, for far more legitimate reasons than many attempted cancellations I've seen in the past. The guy was the driver behind many initiatives, but on a personal level I'd no longer want to meet him.
        paskozdilar 4y ago
        > for far more legitimate reasons than many attempted cancellations I've seen in the past What reasons do you mean? > The guy was the driver behind many initiatives, but on a personal level I'd no longer want to meet him. What made you feel this way, exactly?
        selfhoster11 4y ago
        > What reasons do you mean? There has been some easy to find coverage of all the recent controversies. This video [0] is a decent starting point, but it's really easy to find relevant information by plugging in a few keywords into any search engine. Overall, he's not a good fit in a leadership position given what others have been seeing. I don't care enough to call for him to be cancelled, but I would support removal from any public speaking position at the FSF. If they can find someone equally hardline on software freedoms but more acceptable in interpersonal interactions, he should go immediately. > What made you feel this way, exactly? There wasn't any single thing that threw me off (except maybe personal hygiene habits), but the sum of everything that's going on, crossed my "this is OK" threshold. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2SKenHRhMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2SKenHRhMg

selfhoster11 4y ago

The only reason they are the gatekeepers, is because they are the ones with all the GPUs. OpenAI seems to be counting on that as their moat vs all the plebs who want to use GPT-3 for "unapproved" purposes, at least.

w4ffl35 4y ago
I think they will try to ban us from the technology, or force us to be registered to use it on their system under supervision. my guess is that the future will involve thumb-printing these models in some way to determine where they came from and who developed them.
- selfhoster11 4y ago
  Good luck. This will take the ban on unlicensed general-purpose computation - which incidentally, has more and more pieces dropping into place thanks to the wonders of DRM.
  - w4ffl35 4y ago
    true, these people circumvent law, not play by it. But clearly they do their best to wall us off and push us towards the registered paid model that I mentioned.
  - paskozdilar 4y ago
    Good thing we have FSF and EFF on our side. Not to mention RMS.
    - aaaaaaaaaaab 4y ago
      RMS? They simply canceled the guy a few years ago…
      - paskozdilar 4y ago
        RMS is back in FSF, and as far as I know, nothing has changed. The "cancellation" attempt was a good try, though. Really made me worried.
      - selfhoster11 4y ago
        IMO, for far more legitimate reasons than many attempted cancellations I've seen in the past. The guy was the driver behind many initiatives, but on a personal level I'd no longer want to meet him.
        paskozdilar 4y ago
        > for far more legitimate reasons than many attempted cancellations I've seen in the past What reasons do you mean? > The guy was the driver behind many initiatives, but on a personal level I'd no longer want to meet him. What made you feel this way, exactly?
        selfhoster11 4y ago
        > What reasons do you mean? There has been some easy to find coverage of all the recent controversies. This video [0] is a decent starting point, but it's really easy to find relevant information by plugging in a few keywords into any search engine. Overall, he's not a good fit in a leadership position given what others have been seeing. I don't care enough to call for him to be cancelled, but I would support removal from any public speaking position at the FSF. If they can find someone equally hardline on software freedoms but more acceptable in interpersonal interactions, he should go immediately. > What made you feel this way, exactly? There wasn't any single thing that threw me off (except maybe personal hygiene habits), but the sum of everything that's going on, crossed my "this is OK" threshold. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2SKenHRhMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2SKenHRhMg