7 ms·
Firing Sam over concerns about safety and commercialization would be so myopic. OpenAI’s commercial success is the engine that fuels their research and digs th
by bigyikes 3y ago
Firing Sam over concerns about safety and commercialization would be so myopic.
OpenAI’s commercial success is the engine that fuels their research and digs their moat.
Slowing down that engine means giving other companies, who may not share Sutskever et al’s safety concerns, the opportunity to catch up.
The best way for OpenAI to preserve AI safety is to stay far ahead of the competition. That’s the only way they can verify safety and install guardrails for the cutting edge.
The doomer board better hope that whichever company eventually surpasses OpenAI is as concerned about safety as they are.
- disantlor 3y agosame logic was used in ww2
- andy99 3y agoOne is a weapon of unimaginable destructive power, the other is matrix multiplication.
- javajosh 3y agoDisengenuous in the extreme. If AI is just matrix multiplication, than a nuke is just lots of light emitted at once.
- pixl97 3y agoYou've heard the term "The pen is mightier than the sword" right? AI is it's own damned pen. All were waiting for is some dumbass to give it terminal goals.
- sebzim4500 3y agoIt was much more sensible in that case. Here, it's not clear that too companies with a superintelligent AI is really any less bad than one.
- SonOfLilit 3y agoWe (including the OpenAI board) are trying to keep it at zero.
- monooso 3y agoPlease explain.
- mckirk 3y ago"If we don't build the atomic bomb, the Germans will beat us to it." (I assume)
- cratermoon 3y agoIt's also the logic of nuclear weapons and MAD.
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoI wouldn't mind this linkage being a little more pointed. How is growth, thus being bigger and more in control of your own outcomes, linked to WW2. If Germany had higher growth rate, then maybe they wouldn't have swung right wing? Or are you saying that by 'appeasing' the 'growth' side, that is similar to WW2 appeasement strategy? So if we hamper growth, that gives more control?
- dirtyhippiefree 3y agoIt’s not growth of the economy, it’s growth of the successor to humanity… Apples and oranges…
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoOk. What is link to WW2?
- dylan604 3y agothat's just flawed logic. eventually, everyone will catch up regardless.
- metabagel 3y agoThis is a self-contradictory argument. Basically, you’re saying that OpenAI can’t risk acting on safety concerns or they may lose their market edge, in which case their safety concerns would be moot. I don’t see anywhere that safety is prioritized in either case.
- Obscurity4340 3y agoCan someone please define "safety"? I keep hearing this but could you clarify what that means in practical terms? Is that why there's a "BasedGPT"?
- metabagel 3y agoBasically, it amounts to working around the issue that AI has no morals or code of ethics and is unconstrained from certain human limitations, such as processing speed and replication speed. It thinks different than we do, and these differences will only become more pronounced as capability grows by orders of magnitude.
- Obscurity4340 3y agoNeither do search engines really. Like why does ChatGPT have to be considered so different from that when you could literally do all the same prompts in the form of searches and many search engines do the same thing at the very top as a quasi-summary? All that is required is to "string them together"
- otabdeveloper4 3y agoAI doesn't think, it is just a fancy madlibs engine.
- Obscurity4340 3y agoIsn't AI probabalistic, to what exent is thinking also probabalistic?
- 3y ago
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 3y ago> OpenAI’s commercial success Doesn't it lose money on gpt-4 usage? Or at least on the chatgpt side? It reminds me of all the startups that price unsustainably low until they "win" then start really charging, then start to slowly decay.
- juunpp 3y agoAre you questioning GP's mythology with facts and properly-done research?
- School-Cotton 3y agoPlease keep these Reddit meme responses on Reddit.