6 ms·
Many are speculating that Sam Altman could just move on and create another OpenAI 2.0 because he could easily attract talent and investors. What this misses is
by agnosticmantis 3y ago
Many are speculating that Sam Altman could just move on and create another OpenAI 2.0 because he could easily attract talent and investors.
What this misses is all the regulatory capture that he’s been campaigning for. All the platforms have now closed their gardens. Authors and artists are much more vigilant about copyright etc. So it’s now a totally different game compared to 3 years ago because the data is not just there up for grabs anymore.
- shmatt 3y agoExactly. If new Altman AI company is the next big thing, then Astral AI is the next trillion dollar company Easier said than done
- sensanaty 3y agoI've never considered this angle, but god it'd be hilarious if this ended up being the case, the dude ruining everything because of his own greed ultimately fucking himself over because of it. Here's to hoping there's still some poetic irony left to dish out in the world.
- Loughla 3y agoSeriously, this will be the exact reason the word schadenfreude exists.
- treesciencebot 3y ago"Why Sam Altman (who can have the funding, talent, and the vision OpenAI has right now) can't just create OpenAI 2.0?" is an amazing question that also answers whats OpenAI's moat. People speculated it was the funding, or attracting talent or having "access". Turns out it was none of them (obviously they all have a part, but having all three doesn't mean you can best OpenAI which gives you the fundemental reason why it is so hard to compete with them).
- shoelessone 3y agoIs the logic here that training a base model isn’t as easy or even possible in the same way that OpenAI did in the past, and that what they have in a trained model is valuable in that even with all the code and experience it couldn’t be reproduced today with new restrictions?
- coderenegade 3y agoYes, potentially. The data has to come from somewhere, and all of the outlets that were used to train ChatGPT, stable diffusion, etc. have since been locked down. Any new company that Sam Altman makes in the AI space won't be competing just on merits of talent and product, they will also need to pay for and negotiate access to data. I'd actually expect this to get far worse going forward, now that other organizations have an idea of how valuable their data is. It's also trivial to justify locking it down under the guise of protecting people, privacy, etc.
- rblatz 3y agoCouldn’t he just partner with Microsoft and start with the Bing corpus?
- piuantiderp 3y agoWhat if Microsoft, et al, signed exclusivity with OpenAI?
- CommandDo 3y agoBy the sounds of it, they just DID.
- Zambyte 3y agoHe should make ClosedAI and then publish all the work as open source
- Shekelphile 3y agoI don't think getting training data is that hard still, the biggest platforms that locked down their APIs still use them for their mobile apps and can easily be reverse engineered to find keys or undocumented endpoints (or in the case of reddit, an entirely different internal API with less limits and a lot more info leaks...)
- bloqs 3y agoCan you explain the reddit one?
- 4death4 3y agoAssuming the Reddit app does not use certificate pinning, you can use your computer to provide internet to your phone and then use an app like Charles Proxy to inspect requests being made from an app. Pretty easy to reverse engineer the API. If the app does use certificate pinning, then you can use an Android phone and a modified app that removes the logic that enforces certificate pinning. This is more involved but also not impossible.
- philistine 3y agoThat does not sound like the proper way to do an openAI 2.0. If Reddit ever hears that's how an AI company scraped them, they'll get sued for fun and profits.
- facu17y 3y agoYou are assuming he wouldn't steal t from OpenAI. He could have a low level employee steal it, and manage to keep it a secret until AGI is born then he takes over the world.
- jacquesm 3y agoThis is a pretty wild comment. That's a very safe assumption and no low level employee will do Sams bidding in an illegal enterprise. And keeping it a secret isn't going to work either and whether or not AGI is 'born' (who will bear it) is an open question to which I hope the answer is 'not for a while'. Because we haven't even figured out how to get humans to cooperate which I think should be a prerequisite.
- mcpackieh 3y ago> no low level employee will do Sams bidding in an illegal enterprise Many people have betrayed their country to foreign governments in exchange for mere thousands of dollars. It is never safe to rule out the willingness of employees to engage in corporate espionage, even in exchange for truly pitiful rewards. It would be a stupid idea, but that doesn't mean it won't happen.
- aj0strow 3y agoI would bet the senior researchers know exactly how and where to get plenty of tokens.
- jacquesm 3y agoWhat has been crawled stays crawled and there are plenty of copies of sets of tokens that can be used to retrain a model. For a bit of money you can probably get any set that you really want (bit: billions, but pocket change for anything that is going to go head to head with OpenAI).
- yalogin 3y agoOpenAI has enough momentum and built enough moat that Sam Altman cannot replicate it. If he can actually replicate it and over take openai, then the business itself has no legs as it will be easily commoditized and any moat nullified in no time
- paulddraper 3y ago...unless he takes half the key employees with him.
- qingcharles 3y agoThere are still huge vaults of untapped data. I'm building a magazine encyclopedia and I would estimate that 99.9% of all magazines ever published are not available electronically. And that the content in magazines probably exceeds the content in books by an order of magnitude.
- anacrolix 3y agoOrders of magnitude require at least 3 data points, and you have only 2.
- Vingdoloras 3y agoI know this is getting off-topic, but as a non-native speaker, I'm interested in hearing how a third data point would be needed to judge whether things differ "by an order of magnitude". I was under the impression that "an order of magnitude" meant "one more digit", meaning very roughly a 10x difference. "a >= 10*b" can be determined without the need of a third data point. Is there some other meaning to the phrase I haven't come across?
- pilotneko 3y agoNot the original poster, but you have it more or less correct. An order of magnitude is 10X. Orders of magnitude just refers to “at least 100X.” Colloquially, orders of magnitude just means “significantly more/less.”
- paulddraper 3y agoThere are massive numbers of archives.