[meowface]

They needed capital to build what they wanted to build, so they switched from non-profit to capped-profit: https://openai.com/index/openai-lp/

We never would've gotten GPT-3 and GPT-4 if this didn't happen.

I think the irony of the name is certainly worth pointing out, but I don't see an issue with their capped-profit switch.

[voiceblue]

> We never would've gotten GPT-3 and GPT-4 if this didn't happen.

"We never would've gotten [thing that exists today] if [thing that happened] didn't happen", is practically a tautology. As you saw from the willingness of Microsoft to throw compute as well as to hire ex-OpenAI folks, as you can see from the many "spinoffs" others have started (such as Anthropic), whether or not we would've gotten GPT-3 and GPT-4 is immaterial to this discussion. What people here are asking for is open AI, which we might, all things considered, have actually gotten from a bona fide non profit.

[vintermann]

> We never would've gotten GPT-3 and GPT-4 if this didn't happen

Well, of course. But we'd get similarly powerful models elsewhere. Maybe a few weeks or months later. Maybe even a few weeks or months earlier, if, say, OpenAI sucked up a lot of talent and used it wastefully, which I don't find implausible at all.

[versteegen]

You forget that, at that time, OpenAI pushed SoTA LLMs massively forward by scaling them up ~3-4 orders of magnitude when others didn't think that would work or weren't willing to spend the money. But not just that. Following their example, Google and nVidia also attempted to scale up transformers but without really managing to push the SoTA.

So, I agree instead with meowface, and think it could even have been a 5+ year delay rather than 2 or 3. If you look at breakthroughs rather than incremental improvements, 5 years is not a long timescale. (And if OpenAI hadn't have made their breakthroughs, production of the highest-end GPUs/TPUs would be nowhere near where it is today.)

(I'm not attempting to justify OpenAI's structure or behaviour, just want to comment on one point.)

[meowface]

It's impossible to prove or disprove a counterfactual, but my guess is it would create a delay of at least one year, and possibly two or three.

[refulgentis]

Maybe all companies are doomed this way, but it was the first step on a slippery slope. Not in terms of the slippery slope logical fallacy, that's only apply if someone argued they'd end up force-hiding output before GPT-3 if they went capped profit

[paperplatter]

If they want to be for-profit because that's how they get the investment to build GPT-4, fine, do it from the start. That doesn't justify the switch.

[meowface]

It certainly would've been better, but they made OpenAI years before even GPT-1. They didn't realize how much money they'd need to scale the model or how insufficient donations would be.

I think the world is much better off with them having switched the structure vs. throwing their hands in the air and giving up because they were stuck as a non-profit forever.

[tasuki]

There was no "switch". It's a parent non-profit owning the for profit corporation.

The for profit part is fine, but how is the non-profit currently fulfilling any of its mission?

[moralestapia]

>We never would've gotten GPT-3 and GPT-4 if this didn't happen.

That doesn't justify fraud, for instance.

Unfortunately, people are becoming increasingly illiterate with regards to what is legal and what is not.

[meowface]

Where's the fraud and illegality? If they did something illegal why weren't they charged years ago?

[moralestapia]

>Where's the fraud and illegality?

Read. [1]

>If they did something illegal why weren't they charged years ago?

Because the Microsoft/OpenAI deal was not even a thing "years ago". (Duh.)

That aside, I will answer the charitable interpretation of your question by sharing a bit of knowledge about how the law process works (in the Western hemisphere).

To put someone who committed fraud in jail, law enforcement conducts an investigation to gather evidence, leading to criminal charges filed by the prosecutor.

The defendant is arraigned, and pre-trial motions may be filed before the case goes to trial, where both sides present their arguments and evidence.

If found guilty, the court imposes a sentence, which can include incarceration, restitution, and fines. The defendant may appeal the verdict.

This is a very simplified overview of the whole ordeal, which could go on for years and years depending on the complexity of the case.

1: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/aug/05/e...

[meowface]

I think OpenAI and others persuasively shot down Musk's claims.

I'd be happy to bet you over whether or not OpenAI or Altman ever face criminal penalties over what's stated in that article.