[steev]

I don't see how this is a nuanced perspective - it seems to restate the same complaints/arguments just about every comment makes in these discussions.

A nuanced perspective would look at the arguments as to why OpenAI is doing the things they are doing. For example:

* OpenAI publishes in closed journals (actually conference proceedings) because that is where all the cutting edge research is published and reviewed. I cannot recall an OpenAI paper that wasn't available either via arXiv or their website, despite being published in a closed journal. What is the alternative here? Where should they go for quality peer-review? Yes you can argue the peer review at top conferences is not quality, but is worse quality than no peer-review or peer review from open-access no-name journals?

* How does OpenAI make money? How much are they bringing in? How much does it cost to support things like the OpenAI Gym, etc.? How much does it cost OpenAI in terms of bandwidth to host pre-trained versions of GPT-3? At some point a company needs to make money and prioritize resources - they can't give everything away for free in perpetuity.

I don't think these questions have obvious answers - there is give and take.

[JamesBarney]

It seems like there are a lot of good reasons for every choice they made.

Organizations are constantly making decisions that are trading off certain values for others, i.e. openness vs safety/expediency/funding. But if they use the word open in their name, signalling to people that is one of their foundational values, people will expect them to pick openness even when it's not necessarily the easiest, safest, most expedient, or most profitable choice. They expect them to pick openness when it's hard.

[joelg]

> At some point a company needs to make money

:-/

OpenAI started as a non-profit.

[eightysixfour]

Non-profit does not mean “spends money in perpetuity with no revenue.”

[eggsnbacon1]

that's not what happened with OpenAI though. They're not a non-profit anymore, they changed to a "controlled profit" (lol) model.

I didn't know this was even possible/legal. Start as a non-profit for all the tax advantages and convert to for-profit once you've got a saleable product? Maybe startups should start doing this

[chrisco255]

What's the point? If your business doesn't turn a profit then you don't owe business income taxes anyways. Most businesses take several years to reach profitability.

[texasbigdata]

I thought it was capped profit not controlled.

[PatrolX]

"OpenAI is governed by the board of OpenAI Nonprofit, which consists of OpenAI LP employees Greg Brockman (Chairman & CTO), Ilya Sutskever (Chief Scientist), and Sam Altman (CEO), and non-employees Adam D’Angelo, Holden Karnofsky, Reid Hoffman, Shivon Zilis, and Tasha McCauley."

https://openai.com/blog/openai-lp/

[tedivm]

The NFL is also managed by a non-profit. Just because you're managed by a non-profit doesn't mean your company is also a non-profit.

[gowld]

The NFL is a (nonprofit) trade association for NFL team companies.

[obmelvin]

Yes, but the computing they are trying to do is expensive, so it makes sense to then try and get some self-sustaining revenue by leveraging their research into a software service. I must admit I don't know about their current status of funding from large companies etc, but I do think it makes sense to try and make a bit of their own money to be more independent.

[jcims]

Non-profit doesn't mean zero revenue.

[steev]

The Girl Scouts are a non-profit yet they don't give their cookies away for free.

[Mediterraneo10]

Girl Scouts USA has been a textbook example for decades now of an institution that misuses non-profit status for financial gain.

[cy6erlion]

Good point, but their name does not imply that their cookies are free.

[john4534243]

> OpenAI publishes in closed journals (actually conference proceedings) because that is where all the cutting edge research is published and reviewed.

Ok. So whats the point of OpenAI then ?