5 ms·

I’m a bit surprised of how antagonistic HN is against the builders, Sam was/is a Seller, it’s a needed function to pair with Builders, but no one can reasonably

by aakil 3y ago

I’m a bit surprised of how antagonistic HN is against the builders, Sam was/is a Seller, it’s a needed function to pair with Builders, but no one can reasonably say that Sam built anything, Ilya and the safety contingent are the builders, but somehow the mob is angry at them for protecting what they made from the Sellers, kind of hard to see us becoming so profit motivated that we choose IBM over Woz

TheCaptain4815 3y ago
550/700 OpenAi employees aka builders side with Sam, and that's 550 so far. No builders there wanted this except one I guess (llya).
- highduc 3y ago
  But do they build for free? Or do they build for money, and especially for the perspective of even more money?
  - kcb 3y ago
    In our society, why should they be expected to build for free? Unless you only hire previously wealthy individuals the idea that there's this class of selfless scientists at the top of their field that don't need to pay a mortgage or support a family is absurd.
    - hervature 3y ago
      In case you do not understand why you are being downvoted. This is precisely what the person you are replying to is saying. When push comes to shove, will these builders prefer a paycheck or stand on their principles.
    - kklisura 3y ago
      If linux was not free - we would not be having this conversation and we would live in a drastically different world.
      - mikrl 3y ago
        Tell me in which country Linux was first developed? Which part of the world is that? Do the countries there have something special which they are well known for, and which might make unpaid passion projects more attainable than, say, 2020s North America?
- sasmithjr 3y ago
  > No builders there wanted this except one I guess (llya). Ilya signed the letter, too, and has posted an apology[0]. [0] - https://nitter.net/ilyasut/status/1726590052392956028?s=20 https://nitter.net/ilyasut/status/1726590052392956028?s=20
  - sdfghswe 3y ago
    He posted an apology because he failed. If he had succeeded we would've said "it was very difficult but it was the right thing to do"
  - raverbashing 3y ago
    Except you can't really apologize after stabbing someone in the back Sounds more like a regret than anything else
Zpalmtree 3y ago
Ilya seems to be the guy telling people to stop building under some vague safety fears
suslik 3y ago
I don't care too much about Sam. He seems to me just a bloke that was at the right place at the right time. With the builders, though - I always felt so much contempt to the extremities of AI safety "they" seem to be pushing (and many, I knoq, feel the same) - that makes it rather hard to emphasise.
DebtDeflation 3y ago
>Ilya and the safety contingent are the builders Ilya, yes. But in what universe are the AI Safety people the builders?
lawn 3y ago
HN cheered on Elisabeth Holmes as well.
brookst 3y ago
It makes more sense if you think of it as reacting to the people and their actions rather than their perceived tribe.
FrustratedMonky 3y ago
Exactly, how are the researchers going to get all the compute power they need without the 'seller's selling something? Like it or not ChatGPT took the country by storm, has name recognition, generating revenue. And that all allows them to purchase more compute, hire more researchers. What do they think will happen if they stop selling? Will they work for free?
hilux 3y ago
That is such a good point! OpenAI board completely messed up the framing.
sage76 3y ago
It might be the influx of all the MBA-CEO-Steve-Job wannabe types due to the tech boom and normalisation of tech entrepreneurship, and due to YC becoming a brand.
- toyg 3y ago
  HN has always been full of those types - in fact, much more than your average forum. They have only been outnumbered fairly recently.
endtime 3y ago
It's contempt for the Yudkowskyans ("AI doomers"), not contempt for the builders. I find these threads deeply frustrating, as a long-time Yudkowskyan, because approximately zero of the critics show any understanding at all of the arguments involved, and the vast majority seem not even to have tried to understand the core concern. Most seem to be engaging in some kind of status demonstration, sneering at a group of panicked nerds, rather than having any actual technical opinion at all. Unlike another poster, I don't think this indicates that HN is full of MBA types. Just average software engineers.
guhcampos 3y ago
Is this what's happening, though? Haven't seen any sort of indication that there's a Builders x Sellers debate here.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
wrsh07 3y ago
My impression is that Greg and Ilya are both builders, and so one of the builders picked Sam. Eg see this Twitter exchange between Greg and Ilya: https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1359603222491451394?lang=en https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1359603222491451394?lang=en
dogman144 3y ago
This is my main observation as well watching this play out. I’ve welcomed how a non-profit board finally “struck back” on the trend of the commercialization and rollout of an incomplete yet highly impactful technology. It might have been imperfectly done, but it was done. We went though scaling at all costs with social media etc and lived through the last several years to pay for that choice. Watching AI the last year felt like that was all starting again. OAI’s 700 employees not having as clear a route to fat RSU payouts as they did on Friday seems to be the least important concern here. This technology and its impacts are greater than any 1 company or founder. The idea of another Zuck situation sitting on it in control is not good. Zero lessons were learned from ‘07-2022.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

by aakil 3y ago

TheCaptain4815 3y ago

550/700 OpenAi employees aka builders side with Sam, and that's 550 so far. No builders there wanted this except one I guess (llya).

highduc 3y ago
But do they build for free? Or do they build for money, and especially for the perspective of even more money?
- kcb 3y ago
  In our society, why should they be expected to build for free? Unless you only hire previously wealthy individuals the idea that there's this class of selfless scientists at the top of their field that don't need to pay a mortgage or support a family is absurd.
  - hervature 3y ago
    In case you do not understand why you are being downvoted. This is precisely what the person you are replying to is saying. When push comes to shove, will these builders prefer a paycheck or stand on their principles.
  - kklisura 3y ago
    If linux was not free - we would not be having this conversation and we would live in a drastically different world.
    - mikrl 3y ago
      Tell me in which country Linux was first developed? Which part of the world is that? Do the countries there have something special which they are well known for, and which might make unpaid passion projects more attainable than, say, 2020s North America?
sasmithjr 3y ago
> No builders there wanted this except one I guess (llya). Ilya signed the letter, too, and has posted an apology[0]. [0] - https://nitter.net/ilyasut/status/1726590052392956028?s=20 https://nitter.net/ilyasut/status/1726590052392956028?s=20
- sdfghswe 3y ago
  He posted an apology because he failed. If he had succeeded we would've said "it was very difficult but it was the right thing to do"
- raverbashing 3y ago
  Except you can't really apologize after stabbing someone in the back Sounds more like a regret than anything else

Zpalmtree 3y ago

Ilya seems to be the guy telling people to stop building under some vague safety fears

suslik 3y ago

I don't care too much about Sam. He seems to me just a bloke that was at the right place at the right time. With the builders, though - I always felt so much contempt to the extremities of AI safety "they" seem to be pushing (and many, I knoq, feel the same) - that makes it rather hard to emphasise.

DebtDeflation 3y ago

>Ilya and the safety contingent are the builders Ilya, yes. But in what universe are the AI Safety people the builders?

lawn 3y ago

HN cheered on Elisabeth Holmes as well.

brookst 3y ago

It makes more sense if you think of it as reacting to the people and their actions rather than their perceived tribe.

FrustratedMonky 3y ago

Exactly, how are the researchers going to get all the compute power they need without the 'seller's selling something? Like it or not ChatGPT took the country by storm, has name recognition, generating revenue. And that all allows them to purchase more compute, hire more researchers. What do they think will happen if they stop selling? Will they work for free?

hilux 3y ago

That is such a good point! OpenAI board completely messed up the framing.

sage76 3y ago

It might be the influx of all the MBA-CEO-Steve-Job wannabe types due to the tech boom and normalisation of tech entrepreneurship, and due to YC becoming a brand.

toyg 3y ago
HN has always been full of those types - in fact, much more than your average forum. They have only been outnumbered fairly recently.

endtime 3y ago

It's contempt for the Yudkowskyans ("AI doomers"), not contempt for the builders. I find these threads deeply frustrating, as a long-time Yudkowskyan, because approximately zero of the critics show any understanding at all of the arguments involved, and the vast majority seem not even to have tried to understand the core concern. Most seem to be engaging in some kind of status demonstration, sneering at a group of panicked nerds, rather than having any actual technical opinion at all. Unlike another poster, I don't think this indicates that HN is full of MBA types. Just average software engineers.

guhcampos 3y ago

Is this what's happening, though? Haven't seen any sort of indication that there's a Builders x Sellers debate here.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

wrsh07 3y ago

My impression is that Greg and Ilya are both builders, and so one of the builders picked Sam. Eg see this Twitter exchange between Greg and Ilya: https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1359603222491451394?lang=en https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1359603222491451394?lang=en

dogman144 3y ago

This is my main observation as well watching this play out. I’ve welcomed how a non-profit board finally “struck back” on the trend of the commercialization and rollout of an incomplete yet highly impactful technology. It might have been imperfectly done, but it was done. We went though scaling at all costs with social media etc and lived through the last several years to pay for that choice. Watching AI the last year felt like that was all starting again. OAI’s 700 employees not having as clear a route to fat RSU payouts as they did on Friday seems to be the least important concern here. This technology and its impacts are greater than any 1 company or founder. The idea of another Zuck situation sitting on it in control is not good. Zero lessons were learned from ‘07-2022.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]