4 ms·
That’s not the sense of open they’ve organized around. In fact, it’s antithetical to it. Theirs is a technocratic sense of open, where select credentialed expe
by swatcoder 3y ago
That’s not the sense of open they’ve organized around. In fact, it’s antithetical to it.
Theirs is a technocratic sense of open, where select credentialed experts collaborate on a rational good without a concentration of control by specific capitalists or nations.
- piuantiderp 3y agoI think your technocratic sense of open is misplaced. At this point OpenAI is clearly controlled by the US and it's ok. If anything one wonders if Altman's ouster has a geopolitical angle, cozying up to other countries and such.
- cmrdporcupine 3y agoI guess I struggle to see how the word "open" can be applied to that, but I also remember how that word was tossed around in the late 80s and early 90s during the Unix wars, and, yeah, shoe fits. The question is how we got to be so powerless as a society that this is the only palette of choices we get to choose from: technocratic semi-autistic engineer-intellects who want to hoist AGI on the world vs self-obsessed tech bro salesdudes who see themselves as modern day Howard Roarks. That's it. Anyways, don't mind me, gonna crawl into a corner and read Dune.
- naveen99 3y agoYeah, not open in the open source or rms way. it’s “for the benefit for all” with the “benefits” decided by the openai board, a la communism, with central planning by “the party”. Surprisingly capitalism actually leads to more benefits for all, because of the decentralization and competition.
- surrealize 3y agoThis definition is an abuse of the word "open"