2 ms·

You are assuming openai is going to end up with a monopoly on all this. IMHO the opposite is going to happen. There are going to be a multitude of companies and

You are assuming openai is going to end up with a monopoly on all this. IMHO the opposite is going to happen. There are going to be a multitude of companies and researchers competing on outdoing what they are doing in terms of quality, cost, and use cases. If big companies put a straight jacket in place to limit access, constrain usage, etc., that just creates the opportunity for others to step up and grab some market share. There are going to be use cases that are uncomfortable for big companies for ethical, political or other reasons. That's fine. That's their reality. But of course others will step into the void that creates with solutions of their own. And there is also the notion that big companies don't like being dependent on other big companies. OpenAI despite the name is very much not so open and really a Microsoft subsidiary in all but name. So, the likes of Amazon, Facebook, Google, and others are not going to be waiting for them to deliver new features and be creating their own strategies for competing. And that's just the big companies. The rest of the industry will do the same as soon as cost allows them to do that.

DoingIsLearning 4y ago
Indeed, I just saw a demo of Adobe Firefly, and the surprising thing to me is the whole thing was developed internally from data they control. Looking at Nvidia's rental solutions for Nvidia’s A100, it really feels like Future products will be driven by who is sitting on the biggest closed source training datasets more so than this specific success from OpenAI's research.
malwrar 4y ago
I personally expect that regulation or collusion among big tech players (e.g. the suppression of parlor) will prevent the average person or company from having the legal or practical ability to amass the compute power and dataset necessary to train a competing LLM (or future arch). No one really seems to know if OpenAI’s use of copyrighted materials like published works and open source code for training its LLM is legal. I can easily see a future where use of copyrighted works like this simply can’t be repeated legally, and the compute power necessary to do it as an individual is made inaccessible. This especially if the resulting model is made open to everyone, it’s such a wild cultural shift to me seeing tech nerds advocating against democratization of this tech due to personal doomsday fantasies. The sheer number of people who exist in the community and are obsessed with alignment and ethics will provide plenty of ideas on practical constraints the non-technical powerful could impose to make this real.
- FormerBandmate 4y ago
  The suppresssion of Parler is honestly the perfect example of how quickly those efforts fail. You know what the modern Parler is? Twitter.(Also Truth Social, which is owned and run by a former President)

DoingIsLearning 4y ago

Indeed, I just saw a demo of Adobe Firefly, and the surprising thing to me is the whole thing was developed internally from data they control. Looking at Nvidia's rental solutions for Nvidia’s A100, it really feels like Future products will be driven by who is sitting on the biggest closed source training datasets more so than this specific success from OpenAI's research.

malwrar 4y ago

I personally expect that regulation or collusion among big tech players (e.g. the suppression of parlor) will prevent the average person or company from having the legal or practical ability to amass the compute power and dataset necessary to train a competing LLM (or future arch). No one really seems to know if OpenAI’s use of copyrighted materials like published works and open source code for training its LLM is legal. I can easily see a future where use of copyrighted works like this simply can’t be repeated legally, and the compute power necessary to do it as an individual is made inaccessible. This especially if the resulting model is made open to everyone, it’s such a wild cultural shift to me seeing tech nerds advocating against democratization of this tech due to personal doomsday fantasies. The sheer number of people who exist in the community and are obsessed with alignment and ethics will provide plenty of ideas on practical constraints the non-technical powerful could impose to make this real.

FormerBandmate 4y ago
The suppresssion of Parler is honestly the perfect example of how quickly those efforts fail. You know what the modern Parler is? Twitter.(Also Truth Social, which is owned and run by a former President)