4 ms·

I am soooooooooo glad this happened. OpenAI has defaulted on their promise of openness and it seems a lot of models are gatekept by profiteering and paternalist

I am soooooooooo glad this happened. OpenAI has defaulted on their promise of openness and it seems a lot of models are gatekept by profiteering and paternalistic moralism All it takes is one good, actually open project to sidestep all of their chicanery.

yazzku 4y ago
ActuallyOpenAI
mhuffman 4y ago
Yes, and the end of the world they predicted if text-to-image technology got into the hands of bigots or if celebrities/politicians were deep-faked into odd situations, etc ... just has not materialized. I really think (and always thought) that the whole ethical reason for withholding access was bullshit! Same with generative text from prompts.
- TigeriusKirk 4y ago
  There are some people making images that almost anyone would find offensive. But I haven't noticed those images having any impact at all, at least not yet.
- yoyohello13 4y ago
  I think those ethical concerns are very real. It's just inevitable that this technology will be used for nefarious purposes. But withholding access to the tech, can't do anything to avoid the inevitable.
  - XorNot 4y ago
    Well there's also the problem that if technology is possible but kept proprietary, then it is not expected that it will be used. This increases its power. A world where deep fakes are well known and accessible technology undermines their nefarious utility (the opposite of course also being a problem: actual video evidence now potentially being undermined).
- serf 4y ago
  > ... just has not materialized. I don't think we comfortably know that yet. For one, software takes a bit to diffuse into the public usage, secondly if you were the victim of blackmail or some other such criminal activity that was perpetrated with the use of such a system you wouldn't raise your hand immediately -- you'd get clear of the problem -- and then afterwards depending on how embarassing the situation is you'd speak out publicly. Many victims will never identify the methods used, and most will never speak out publicly. In other words, systems like this could be being used to harass people and it'd take a bit of time before 'the public' was ever very aware of it being an ongoing problem.
  - coding123 4y ago
    I'm pretty sure we haven't seen the deepfakes we are expecting yet. Give it a couple months for grainy photos of Clinton in the basement of a pizza parlor with handcuffs in the background.
    - tomByrer 4y ago
      Or actual photos of Clinton at a certain island that are real but called deep fakes? I thought of a Scifi series years ago where puppeteers could force politicians say anything they wanted just by the threat of a deep fake.
    - enlyth 4y ago
      Don't worry, these AI models can't draw faces and hands properly yet, I'd give it some more time
scifibestfi 4y ago
It begs the question: Did they believe there would be no competition?
- capableweb 4y ago
  That's usually how innovation stagnation happens. Tons of examples all around. Intel and AMD were fighting, at one point Intel got a solid lead on AMD but eventually they became to overconfident and became lazy. Same will probably happen with AMD eventually, just a matter of how long the cycles are.
debdut 4y ago
the paternalistic moralism has nothing to do with safety, but absolutely more with creating the hype and keeping it proprietary ofc

yazzku 4y ago

ActuallyOpenAI

mhuffman 4y ago

Yes, and the end of the world they predicted if text-to-image technology got into the hands of bigots or if celebrities/politicians were deep-faked into odd situations, etc ... just has not materialized. I really think (and always thought) that the whole ethical reason for withholding access was bullshit! Same with generative text from prompts.

TigeriusKirk 4y ago
There are some people making images that almost anyone would find offensive. But I haven't noticed those images having any impact at all, at least not yet.
yoyohello13 4y ago
I think those ethical concerns are very real. It's just inevitable that this technology will be used for nefarious purposes. But withholding access to the tech, can't do anything to avoid the inevitable.
- XorNot 4y ago
  Well there's also the problem that if technology is possible but kept proprietary, then it is not expected that it will be used. This increases its power. A world where deep fakes are well known and accessible technology undermines their nefarious utility (the opposite of course also being a problem: actual video evidence now potentially being undermined).
serf 4y ago
> ... just has not materialized. I don't think we comfortably know that yet. For one, software takes a bit to diffuse into the public usage, secondly if you were the victim of blackmail or some other such criminal activity that was perpetrated with the use of such a system you wouldn't raise your hand immediately -- you'd get clear of the problem -- and then afterwards depending on how embarassing the situation is you'd speak out publicly. Many victims will never identify the methods used, and most will never speak out publicly. In other words, systems like this could be being used to harass people and it'd take a bit of time before 'the public' was ever very aware of it being an ongoing problem.
- coding123 4y ago
  I'm pretty sure we haven't seen the deepfakes we are expecting yet. Give it a couple months for grainy photos of Clinton in the basement of a pizza parlor with handcuffs in the background.
  - tomByrer 4y ago
    Or actual photos of Clinton at a certain island that are real but called deep fakes? I thought of a Scifi series years ago where puppeteers could force politicians say anything they wanted just by the threat of a deep fake.
  - enlyth 4y ago
    Don't worry, these AI models can't draw faces and hands properly yet, I'd give it some more time

scifibestfi 4y ago

It begs the question: Did they believe there would be no competition?

capableweb 4y ago
That's usually how innovation stagnation happens. Tons of examples all around. Intel and AMD were fighting, at one point Intel got a solid lead on AMD but eventually they became to overconfident and became lazy. Same will probably happen with AMD eventually, just a matter of how long the cycles are.

debdut 4y ago

the paternalistic moralism has nothing to do with safety, but absolutely more with creating the hype and keeping it proprietary ofc