6 ms·
> Elon understood the mission did not imply open-sourcing AGI. As Ilya told Elon: “As we get closer to building AI, it will make sense to start being less open.
by magnio 3y ago
> Elon understood the mission did not imply open-sourcing AGI. As Ilya told Elon: “As we get closer to building AI, it will make sense to start being less open. The Open in openAI means that everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built, but it's totally OK to not share the science...”, to which Elon replied: “Yup”.
Wow the most open OpenAI has ever been is when someone sue them.
On the other hand, this shows Elon doesn't care jackshit about the lack of openness from OpenAI. He's just mad only that he walked away from a monumental success.
- behnamoh 3y ago[flagged]
- TMWNN 3y agoIf Musk is a has-been, he's the most-successful has-been in history by a factor of 100.
- sidcool 3y agoYes. I think the same. Elon is just bitter he misjudged and now wants to claw back without seeming a giant a-hole.
- sroussey 3y agoHe has celebrityitus — he is so far gone from knowing anyone that doesn’t suck up to him that he can help but look like a giant a-hole all the time because everyone round him will tell him that he is cool and right. And it doesn’t take being that rich to have this problem. Even minor celebs in L.A. have this problem!
- archagon 3y ago[dead]
- dang 3y agoI'm sure many if not most here would agree, but can you please make your substantive points without fulminating? This is in the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
- throwup238 3y ago[flagged]
- romanovcode 3y agoTrust me, the moment they do discover anything it will first be under the control of CIA, not the nerds who invented it.
- archagon 3y agoThe nerds are getting richer and more powerful by the year. We aren't that far from a dystopian cyberpunk future where corporations take the place of governments.
- devsda 3y ago> The Open in openAI means that everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built.(even though sharing everything is definitely the right strategy in the short and possibly medium term for recruitment purposes). "OpenSource". Open in open source means everyone should benefit from the fruits of source after it is built but it's totally OK to not share the source(Even though calling ourselves open is the right strategy for medium term recruitment and adoption purposes). If anyone tries the same logic with "open" source, they will be ridiculed and laughed at, but here we are.
- repler 3y agoisn’t this the old: free as in speech, not as in beer
- Jensson 3y agoOpenAI isn't free either way, they don't let you do porn etc with their models.
- snoman 3y agoWhat’s more, ChatGPT won’t even attempt to name controversial websites if you’ve forgotten their name.
- devsda 3y ago"Free as in beer" : I doubt anybody is expecting OpenAI to give away their work for free or give free credits/tokens forever. Even when they do, it is no different from a free tier of any other *closed* commercial products. "Free as in speech" : I'm not sure which part of openAI's actions show commitment to this part.
- JieJie 3y agoIt's because they were whispering. https://openai.com/research/whisper https://openai.com/research/whisper
- 3y ago
- greenie_beans 3y agoreally makes the "Open" sound more sinister, like they're opening the ai.
- polynomial 3y agoRelease the kraken.
- Onewildgamer 3y agoLike they rub open the lamp to release the genie. To go with the metaphor, the genie obeys the person holding the lamp, not everybody
- BoiledCabbage 3y ago> this shows Elon doesn't care jackshit about the lack of openness from OpenAI. He's just mad only that he walked away from a monumental success. Yup he's pretty transparently lying here. He committed to fund for $1B dollars. Then when they wouldn't make him CEO and/or roll the company into Tesla he refused his commitment after paying out only 4% of it. Claimed the company would fail and only he could save them (again wrong). And now is mad he doesn't control the top AI out there and because he chose to walk away from them. And yet again people are falling for him. Elon talk never matches his action. And there is still a large portion of the internet that falls for his talk time and time again.
- mlsu 3y agoWhether it is Elon or Altman that controls it has nothing to do with how open or not openAI is. And it has become very clear that OpenAI is nothing but Microsoft in a trenchcoat. No matter his motives, I applaud this lawsuit. Who cares if his talk doesn't match his action? His action, here, is good.
- mac-attack 3y ago[flagged]
- lern_too_spel 3y agoMusk's lawsuit is for breach of contract, but it looks like Musk agreed with what OpenAI did, which means the lawsuit will fail. From the complaint: > Together with Mr. Brockman, the three agreed that this new lab: (a) would be a non-profit developing AGI for the benefit of humanity, not for a for-profit company seeking to maximize shareholder profits; and (b) would be open-source, balancing only countervailing safety considerations, and would not keep its technology closed and secret for proprietary commercial reasons (The “Founding Agreement”). The biggest beneficiary of this lawsuit is Google, which now gets more runway to bumble along to victory.
- gandutraveler 3y agoDo you also own a Tesla?
- resonious 3y agoYeah seems pretty cut and dry. It'd feel pretty bad to see OpenAI doing what they're doing now after saying things like "My probability assessment of OpenAI being relevant to DeepMind/Google without a dramatic change in execution and resources is 0%."
- Jensson 3y agoHe was right though, they did have a dramatic change in execution and resources the next couple of years when they prepared to sell out to Microsoft and that gave them a chance. Elon really gave them good advice there, even if it was snarky.
- gandutraveler 3y ago[flagged]
- boruto 3y agoThat's not what he said. I am not sure how to report, but this user name is offensive. In English it means f***ot.
- barrell 3y agoI don’t think anything about this is cut and dry. You may have a strong opinion on the matter, but at the most charitable it’s people doing their best in a murky situation
- resonious 3y agoI did say it seems cut and dry. It just looks a certain way. I know that things may not be as they seem. Elon's complaints about OpenAI pulling a profit make sense in isolation, but look very different in light of these emails. This blog post is a very good move in OpenAI's favor.
- barrell 3y ago
- carlossouza 3y ago> The Open in openAI means that everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built, but it's totally OK to not share the science... Based on this line of reasoning, ANY company that builds any given technology and intends to share (sell) it to the world, but not divulge how it was done, can call itself OpenWhatever. They are clearly saying that the word “Open” in their name means nothing.
- Centigonal 3y agoThe online versions of Microsoft office apps are free. What if they renamed those to... OpenOffice?
- kamaal 3y agoI laughed out real loud after reading this xD But really there is so much money in this, and if they can make it they are going to be the next Google. It should be obvious they don't want to be 'open' in terms of really making this open source.
- jrflowers 3y ago> They are clearly saying that the word “Open” in their name means nothing. Similarly Microsoft makes incredibly large software and my letters about this have gone unanswered
- simondotau 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcomputer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcomputer
- timeon 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Azure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Azure
- 3y ago
- eftychis 3y agoIn my eyes this is a straw argument. "[T]otally OK not to share the science." I think the reasonable average person would disagree with that. And, it would go against certain goal & financial transparency principles that the IRS demands to bestow the 501(c)3 designation. (e.g. see here https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-to-california-attorney-general-on-openais-nonprofit-status/ https://www.citizen.org/article/letter-to-california-attorne...)
- chatmasta 3y agoIlya's justification for that argument was to link to a SlateStarCodex blog post. We are doomed...
- Atotalnoob 3y agoWhat’s wrong with slatestarcodex? I’ve never heard of them before
- jbc1 3y agoLucky you! It's some of the best content on the internet. My favourite blog for sure. Same guy has continued on with his writing at https://www.astralcodexten.com https://www.astralcodexten.com which is also pretty good but doesn't reach the same highs. What's wrong with it in context though is that as great as it is, it's just some guys blog. It's disconcerting that people would be working on technology they think is more dangerous than nuclear weapons and basing their approach to safety on a random blog post. Although it's disconcerting to think of a committee deciding how it's approached, or the general public, or AI loving researchers, so it might just be a disconcerting topic. If OpenAI or just Ilya think Scott is the best man to have thinking about it though, I would have at least liked them to pay him to do it full time. Blogging isn't even Scott's full time job, and the majority of his stuff isn't even about AI.
- penjelly 3y agonobody said thats the only argument Ilya had, but the points from scott alexander are legitimate and could be addressed even before hiring scott on or having an academic paper written.
- renewiltord 3y agoAt the time, all AI models were hidden inside big corporations. We saw research papers but couldn't use any. OpenAI allowed anyone to access modern LLMs. They were open in the sense that they give everyone access to the model.
- brtkdotse 3y ago> He's just mad This seems to be his natural resting state these days
- ecmascript 3y ago> On the other hand, this shows Elon doesn't care jackshit about the lack of openness from OpenAI. He's just mad only that he walked away from a monumental success. You really come to that conclusion from a "yup"? Damn.
- davej 3y agoThis is misleading. Please read the actual source in context rather than just the excerpt (it's at the bottom of the blog). They are talking about AI safety and not maximizing profit. Here's the previous sentence for context: > “a safe AI is harder to build than an unsafe one, then by opensorucing everything, we make it easy for someone unscrupulous with access to overwhelming amount of hardware to build an unsafe AI, which will experience a hard takeoff.” As an aside: it's frustrating that the parent comment gets upvoted heavily for 7 hours and nobody has bothered to read the relevant context.
- sgift 3y agoI find it good that no one until now provided this bullshit lie as context. The "we need it to be closed for it to be safe" claptrap is the same reasoning people used for feudalism: You see, only certain people are great enough to use AGI responsibly/can be trusted to govern, so we cannot just give the power freely to the unwashed masses, which would use it irresponsibly. You can certainly trust us to use it to help humanity - pinky swear.
- davej 3y agoThis is from an internal email, it was not written for PR. Whether he is correct or not about his concerns, it's clear that this is an honestly held belief by Ilya.