[dkjaudyeqooe]

The benefit is the science, nothing else matters, and having OpenAI decide what matters for everyone is repugnant.

Of course they can give us nothing, but in that case they should start paying taxes and stop claiming they're a public benefit org.

My prediction is they'll produce little of value going forward. They're too distracted by their wet dreams about all the cash they're going to make to focus on the job at hand.

[BriggyDwiggs42]

I agree with your sentiment but the prediction is very silly. Basically every time openai releases something they beat the state of the art in that area by a large margin.

[jakupovic]

We have a saying:

There is always someone smarter than you.

There is always someone stronger than you.

There is always someone richer than you.

There is always someon X than Y.

This is applicable to anything, just because OpenAI has a lead now it doesn't mean they will stay X for long rather than Y.

[ben_w]

> The benefit is the science, nothing else matters, and having OpenAI decide what matters for everyone is repugnant.

OpenAI gets to decide what it does with its intellectual property for the same reason that a whole bunch of people are suing it for using their intellectual property.

It only becomes repugnant to me if they're forcing their morals onto me, which they aren't, because (1) there are other roughly-equal-performance LLMs that aren't from OpenAI, and (2) the stuff it refuses do is a combination of stuff I don't want to exist and stuff I have a surfeit of anyway.

A side effect of (1) is that humanity will get the lowest common (moral and legal) denominator in content from GenAI from different providers, just like the prior experience of us all getting the lowest common (moral and legal) denominator in all types of media content due to internet access connecting us to other people all over the world.

[sumedh]

> The benefit is the science, nothing else matters

Even if that science helps not so friendly countries like Russia?

[jajko]

OpenAI at this point must be literally #1 target for every single big spying agency in whole world.

As we saw previously it doesn't matter much if you are top notch ai researcher, if 1-2 millions of your potential personal wealth are in stake this affect decision making (and probably would mine too).

How much of a bribe would it take for anybody inside with good enough access to switch sides and take all the golden eggs out? 100 million? A billion? Trivial amounts compared to what we discuss. And they will race each other to your open arms for such amounts.

We see sometimes recently ie government officials betraying their own countries to russian spies in Europe for few hundred - few thousands of euros. A lot of people are in some way selfish by nature, or can be manipulated easily via emotions. Secret services across the board are experts in that, it just works(tm).

To sum it up - I don't think it can be protected long term.

[ben_w]

I'm a very weird person with money. I've basically got enough already, even though there are people on this forum who earn more per year than I have in total. My average expenditure is less than €1k/month.

This means I have no idea how to even think about people who could be bribed when they already earn a million a year.

But also, if AI can be developed as far as the dreamers currently making it real hope it can be developed, money becomes as useless to all of us as previous markers of wealth like "a private granary" or "a lawn" or "aluminium cutlery"[0].

[0] https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/51115/did-napole...

[guappa]

Wouldn't you accept a bribe if it's proposed as "an offer you can't refuse"?

[ginko]

Governments WILL use this. There really isn't any real way to keep their hands off technology like this. Same with big corporations.

It's the regular people that will be left out.

[sekai]

> Even if that science helps not so friendly countries like Russia?

Nothing will stop this wave, and the United States will not allow itself to be on the sidelines.