4 ms·
> Indeed, as the November 2023 drama was unfolding, Microsoft’s CEO boasted that it would not matter “[i]f OpenAI disappeared tomorrow.” He explained that “[w]e
by aleksandrh 3y ago
> Indeed, as the November 2023 drama was unfolding, Microsoft’s CEO boasted that it would not matter “[i]f OpenAI disappeared tomorrow.” He explained that “[w]e have all the IP rights and all the capability.” “We have the people, we have the compute, we have the data, we have everything.” “We are below them, above them, around them.”
Yikes.
This technology definitely needs to be open source, especially if we get to the point of AGI. Otherwise Microsoft and OpenAI are going to exploit it for as long as they can get away with it for profit, while open source lags behind.
Reminds me of the moral principles that guided Zimmermann when he made PGP free for everyone: A powerful technology is a danger to society if only a few people possess it. By giving it to everyone, you even the playing field.
- josh2600 3y agoJust going to note that it is widely suspected that Hal Finney did much of the programming on PGP with Zimmermann taking the heat for him.
- Jeff_Brown 3y agoI don't trust OpenAI or Microsoft, but I don't have much faith in democratization either. We wouldn't do that with nukes, after all.
- wolverine876 3y ago> I don't trust OpenAI or Microsoft, but I don't have much faith in democratization either. We wouldn't do that with nukes, after all. Dangerous things are controlled by the government (in a democracy, a form of democratization). It's bizarre and shows the US government's self-inflicted helplessness that they haven't taken over a project that its founders and developers see as a potential danger to civilization.
- nortirn 3y ago[dead]
- paulddraper 3y agoNukes blow up cities.
- jart 3y agoWorks already been done for the most part. Mixtral is to GPT what Linux was to Windows. Mistral AI has been doing such a good job democratizing Microsoft's advantage that Microsoft is beginning to invest in them.
- bugglebeetle 3y agoMicrosoft just bought off Mistral into no longer releasing open weights and scrubbing all references to them from their site…?
- TotempaaltJ 3y agoThere's a "Download" button for their open models literally two clicks away from the homepage. Click "Learn more" under the big "Committing to open models" heading on the homepage. Then, because their deeplinking is bad, click "Open" in the toggle at the top. There's your download link.
- bugglebeetle 3y agoSee “no longer” in my original comment. They just announced their new slate of models, none of which are open weights. The models linked to download are the “before Microsoft $$$, Azure deal, and free supercomputers” ones.
- chasd00 3y agoThis is Linux all over again, Microsoft is going to use every trick and dollar they have to fight open source. /I'm too old to fight that battle again...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- TotempaaltJ 3y agoSure, but they clearly haven't "scrubbed all references" of their open weights from their site.
- sneak 3y agoIf we get to the point of AGI then it doesn’t matter much; the singularity will inevitably occur and the moment that AGI exists, corporations (and the concept of IP) are obsolete and irrelevant. It doesn’t matter if the gap between AGI existing and the singularity is ten hours, ten weeks, ten months, or ten years.
- juanani 3y ago[dead]
- anotherhue 3y ago> A powerful technology is a danger to society if only a few people possess it. By giving it to everyone, you even the playing field. Except nukes. Only allies can have nukes.
- EasyMark 3y agoI guess it you want a nuclear apocalypse then giving the tech to people that would rather see the world end than be "ruled by the apostates", that sounds like a great plan.
- heh89898000 3y ago[flagged]
- viraptor 3y agoIs that really the case? Nukes are supposed to be deterrents. If only groups aligned with each other have nukes that sounds more dangerous than enemies having nukes and knowing they can't use them.
- kristofferR 3y agoUntil people who believe in martyrdom get them
- paulddraper 3y agoRussia has nukes, China has nukes, Pakistan has nukes.... And yet, no countries with nukes have ever gone to war with each other.
- rafram 3y agoIndia and Pakistan fight skirmishes along their contested border all the time. (And re your first line, Pakistan is a US ally, at least in theory.)
- paulddraper 3y ago
- reducesuffering 3y ago> A powerful technology is a danger to society if only a few people possess it. By giving it to everyone, you even the playing field. That's why we all have personal nukes, of course. Very safe
- archagon 3y agoI shudder at a world where only corporations had nukes.
- reducesuffering 3y agoAnd yet, still safer than everyone having nukes... It's unfortunate that the AGI debate still hasn't made it's way very far into these parts. Still have people going, "well this would be bad too." Yes! That is the existential problem a lot of people are grappling with. There is currently and likely, no good way out of this. Too much "Don't Look Up" going on.
- chasd00 3y agonuclear weapons is a ridiculous comparison and only furthers the gas lighting of society. At the barest of bare minimums, AI might, possibly, theoretically, perhaps pose a threat to established power structures (like any disruptive technology does). However, a nuclear weapon definitely destroys physical objects within its effective range. Relating the two is ridiculous.
- esafak 3y agoA disembodied intelligent agent could still trigger or manipulate a person into triggering a weapon.
- jerbear4328 3y agoSo can a human, yet we don't ban those. I don't think AI is going to get better at manipulating people than a sufficiently skilled human. What might be scary is using AI for a mass influence operation, propaganda to convince people that, for example, using a weapon is necessary.
- lagt_t 3y agoThe technologies that power LLMs are open source.
- sebastianconcpt 3y agoNot just for profit. It's also about power.