x86x87

19 ms·

301.
by x86x87 3y ago
I like to believe they actually did their homework and thought this through. We also don't have the full story so it's hard to say.
302.
by x86x87 3y ago
is that codified in the the contract between them though? Microsoft, through the stock price, has much more to lose than OpenAI. The can apply pressure but don't have full control of the outcome here.
303.
by x86x87 3y ago
my question is: why not both? why not pursue the profit and use that to fuel the research into AGI. seems like a best of both worlds.
304.
by x86x87 3y ago
I don't buy the whole the board is for safety and Sam is pushing too fast argument. This is just classic politics and backstabbing unless there is some serious wrongdoing in the middle that left the board with no option to fire the CEO
305.
by x86x87 3y ago
one thing that I am curious about: aren't there non-competes in place here? and even without them, you just cannot start your own thing that just replicates what your previous employer does - this has lawsuit written all over it.
306.
by x86x87 3y ago
not only that but people greatly overestimate how hard it is to replicate the success OpenAi had. you don't just build another one.
307.
by x86x87 3y ago
yeah. this whole thing looks staged. not saying it's not possible but what kind of board would actually fire the CEO and take it back to resign?
308.
by x86x87 3y ago
nope. a coup implies something that is outside of normal operation. the board removing the CEO can and will happen.
309.
by x86x87 3y ago
off the top of my head: prolonged public exchange between sama and the board _before_ any firings where they throw accusations at each other followed by microsoft pulling out, followed by people quitting and immediately resulting in a chatg
310.
by x86x87 3y ago
You can argue your point without calling the take dumb.
311.
by x86x87 3y ago
While the unceremonious firing was bad I am sure this could have gone down way worse than this. Way way worse.
312.
by x86x87 3y ago
The way I think about it is that the struggle is essential if you want to push yourself to learn new things. Learning is a messy process and it's rarely a linjar affair.
313.
by x86x87 3y ago
That's the trick. You should not chase every issue down. You should prioritize, but give one issue you should be able to chase it down and get to the bottom of it. So it's not about actually taking om the task of solving every iss
314.
by x86x87 3y ago
Kids are usually candid /s
315.
by x86x87 3y ago
I think it's a bit naive to believe you can make the jump from chatgpt to AGI. IMHO, those should have been 2 separate tracks where they milked the LLM hype as much as possible and used it to fund AGI research.
316.
by x86x87 3y ago
I mean Musk was one of the original people involved with OpenAI, no? It's his fault we are here /s
317.
by x86x87 3y ago
I think this is a bit harsh. Lack of experience is not necessarily stupidity.
318.
by x86x87 3y ago
i don't see what vaccines have to to with any of this. also, as cool as "facts" are it really bothers me when people take their opinion and present it as fact or as truth. you see: the truth is something abstract and usually,
319.
by x86x87 3y ago
Lol. There are ambitious people working at openai in Ilya's lane that will jump at the opportunity. Nobody owns any lanes.
320.
by x86x87 3y ago
Things can improve along a dimension you choose to measure but there is also the very real risk of openai imploding. Time will tell.
321.
by x86x87 3y ago
This is not commercial vs non commercial imho. This is the old classic humans being humans.
322.
by x86x87 3y ago
You have to define upfront what you want to get from a test. After that you go back and see if what you got is what you expected. Optimistic/Pessimistic does not really matter. By this criteria, I would say failure/partial failure
323.
by x86x87 3y ago
Objectively, for any test to be judged a failure or success you have to define the outcome you want upfront. If you do not any amount of mental gymnastics you you after the test does not matter. It does not matter you call it a win if you a
324.
by x86x87 3y ago
This is a false dichotomy. On one side we are talking about how the "space industry" is most moving slowly and how spacex is doing great things. On the other side we are saying that this is good enough for nasa (who is the establi
325.
by x86x87 3y ago
Sorry but it's just not the same thing. If you, as a human, do stupid things behind the wheel you are personally liable for the outcome. Human drivers are orders of magnitude more capable AND liable than this autopilot joke. If a machi
326.
by x86x87 3y ago
Are there any rules against having a different take on things?
327.
by x86x87 3y ago
Are the folks that build it the most objective observers? You can call a duck an eagle all day long but that does not make it an eagle.
328.
by x86x87 3y ago
Are we reading the same comment? I don't see any dismissal of previous accomplishments. Why is calling this failure a failure bad? You need failures to learn and hopefully be successful eventually.
329.
by x86x87 3y ago
Move fast and break things, amiright?
330.
by x86x87 3y ago
This is not about laughing or not. This is about if it was objectfully a successful test or not. If you want to take the stance that any test is a success that's fine but remember this depends on what your definition of success is. The

More ›