3 ms·

Please ignore this comment, I'm only typing it here to get frustration with this topic off my chest. The talk and marketing from these places is all about impro

Please ignore this comment, I'm only typing it here to get frustration with this topic off my chest. The talk and marketing from these places is all about improving humanity and using AI to benefit everyone whereas the reality is far from this. A few are benefiting and profiting right now, while open AI became closed AI.

sillysaurusx 3y ago
Well, it’s ok to vent about things like that as long as it’s substantive. One way to facilitate this kind of discussion is to remember that topics like this need to become more substantive, not less. As it stands there’s very little in your comment, let alone a substantive point about why OpenAI is bad. It’s hard to argue that OpenAI hasn’t helped pretty much everyone who’s used ChatGPT at all. That they do it for a profit doesn’t really change that equation much. Obviously I’d love to see them open source GPT-4 too, since it was trained on the world’s data. But they’re not compelled to.
- kashyapc 3y ago
  Of course they're "not compelled to". Why would they? The legal/regulatory "situation" allows them to get away at this point. I hope we fix this kind of pilfering soon. We're still navigating the sleaziness (or whatever you call it) involved here to train unfettered on open source and public data, and not meaningfully propagate the benefits back to the contributors. This is uncharted terrain as of now.
lannisterstark 3y ago
>while open AI became closed AI OpenAI was never Open though. Remember pre GPT-3 they had this whole "Omg we made something but its so dangerous we're never going to make it public" bs? https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/17/openai-text-generator-dangerous/?guccounter=1 https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/17/openai-text-generator-dang... >OpenAI built a text generator so good, it’s considered too dangerous to release

sillysaurusx 3y ago

Well, it’s ok to vent about things like that as long as it’s substantive. One way to facilitate this kind of discussion is to remember that topics like this need to become more substantive, not less. As it stands there’s very little in your comment, let alone a substantive point about why OpenAI is bad. It’s hard to argue that OpenAI hasn’t helped pretty much everyone who’s used ChatGPT at all. That they do it for a profit doesn’t really change that equation much. Obviously I’d love to see them open source GPT-4 too, since it was trained on the world’s data. But they’re not compelled to.

kashyapc 3y ago
Of course they're "not compelled to". Why would they? The legal/regulatory "situation" allows them to get away at this point. I hope we fix this kind of pilfering soon. We're still navigating the sleaziness (or whatever you call it) involved here to train unfettered on open source and public data, and not meaningfully propagate the benefits back to the contributors. This is uncharted terrain as of now.

lannisterstark 3y ago

>while open AI became closed AI OpenAI was never Open though. Remember pre GPT-3 they had this whole "Omg we made something but its so dangerous we're never going to make it public" bs? https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/17/openai-text-generator-dangerous/?guccounter=1 https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/17/openai-text-generator-dang... >OpenAI built a text generator so good, it’s considered too dangerous to release