3 ms·

Why the title change? previous title: Based on its own charter, OpenAI should surrender the race

by ambicapter 7mo ago

tokai 7mo ago
Because if mods feels like a title is flamebaiting it will get changed. It rarely makes much sense.
- dang 7mo ago
  Interpretations will always differ, of course, but an equally potent factor is that people tend only to notice the cases they disagree with. The edits that are fine pass without notice because they don't stand out, which is kind of the point of debaiting titles in the first place.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
enraged_camel 7mo ago
Yeah, that was weird. The current title editorializes. @dang can you revert to actual title please?
- kergonath 7mo ago
  > @dang can you revert to actual title please? This does not work. From the guidelines: > Please don't post on HN to ask or tell us something. Send it to hn@ycombinator.com. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
dang 7mo ago
Because it's linkbait. From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." (The article itself strikes me as better than that)
- dwohnitmok 7mo ago
  Really? I view the original title as a very good summary of the overall point of the article and this new title as fairly misleading. > It can be debated whether arena.ai is a suitable metric for AGI, a strong case can probably be made for why it’s not. However, that’s irrelevant, as the spirit of the self-sacrifice clause is to avoid an arms race, and we are clearly in one. > Therefore, one can only conclude, that we currently meet the stated example triggering condition of “a better-than-even chance of success in the next two years”. As per its charter, OpenAI should stop competing with the likes of Anthropic and Gemini, and join forces, however that might look like. The new title is a single, almost throwaway, line from the article. > While this will never happen, I think it’s illustrative of some great points for pondering: > The impotence of naive idealism in the face of economic incentives. The discrepancy between marketing points and practical actions. The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines. Notably, it’s common to now talk about ASI instead, implying we may have already achieved AGI, almost without noticing.

Why the title change? previous title: Based on its own charter, OpenAI should surrender the race

tokai 7mo ago

Because if mods feels like a title is flamebaiting it will get changed. It rarely makes much sense.

dang 7mo ago
Interpretations will always differ, of course, but an equally potent factor is that people tend only to notice the cases they disagree with. The edits that are fine pass without notice because they don't stand out, which is kind of the point of debaiting titles in the first place.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

enraged_camel 7mo ago

Yeah, that was weird. The current title editorializes. @dang can you revert to actual title please?

kergonath 7mo ago
> @dang can you revert to actual title please? This does not work. From the guidelines: > Please don't post on HN to ask or tell us something. Send it to hn@ycombinator.com. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

dang 7mo ago

Because it's linkbait. From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." (The article itself strikes me as better than that)

dwohnitmok 7mo ago
Really? I view the original title as a very good summary of the overall point of the article and this new title as fairly misleading. > It can be debated whether arena.ai is a suitable metric for AGI, a strong case can probably be made for why it’s not. However, that’s irrelevant, as the spirit of the self-sacrifice clause is to avoid an arms race, and we are clearly in one. > Therefore, one can only conclude, that we currently meet the stated example triggering condition of “a better-than-even chance of success in the next two years”. As per its charter, OpenAI should stop competing with the likes of Anthropic and Gemini, and join forces, however that might look like. The new title is a single, almost throwaway, line from the article. > While this will never happen, I think it’s illustrative of some great points for pondering: > The impotence of naive idealism in the face of economic incentives. The discrepancy between marketing points and practical actions. The changing goalposts of AGI and timelines. Notably, it’s common to now talk about ASI instead, implying we may have already achieved AGI, almost without noticing.