3 ms·

I think the real issue is that OpenAI was doomed to fail from the beginning. AI is commercially too valuable to be developed by an organization with a mission l

I think the real issue is that OpenAI was doomed to fail from the beginning. AI is commercially too valuable to be developed by an organization with a mission like them. Eventually they had to make a choice: either become a for-profit without any pretensions about the good of humanity, or stay true to the mission and abandon ambitions of being at the cutting edge of AI development. A non-profit could not have beaten the superpowers in developing the atomic bomb, and a non-profit cannot beat commercial interests in developing AI.

Davidzheng 3y ago
I think it's different bc atomic bomb is pure cost and AI can have returns from products. But your overall point may stand
- dboreham 3y ago
  There's definitely (very large) returns from having atomic weapons.
- lazide 3y ago
  Having the bomb first has infinite ROI.
adolph 3y ago
> either become a for-profit without any pretensions about the good of humanity Not a day passes that I don't hear from some company that has pretensions about the good of humanity and how they are leading the way to it. Plenty of non-profits and government orgs have the same pretensions.
jart 3y ago
I always thought the structure was there to pull the wool over the eyes of the world's smartest researchers, to get them to agree to help them build a doomsday sort of technology. I never expected the board would be drinking their own kool aid.