Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by prydt 104 days ago
I no longer want to support OpenAI at all. Regardless of benchmarks or real world performance.
9 comments

Their trajectory was clear the moment they signed a deal with Microsoft if not sooner.

Absolute snakes - if it's more profitable to manipulate you with outputs or steal your work, they will. Every cent and byte of data they're given will be used to support authoritarianism.

I feel much the same. I know no AI lab is truly 'ethical' or free from some hand in modern warfare, but last week was enough.
Yeah I dropped them. Unfollowed the people working for them on SM
I agree with ya. You aren't alone in this. For what its worth, Chatgpt subscriptions have been cancelled or that number has risen ~300% in the last month.

Also, Anthropic/Gemini/even Kimi models are pretty good for what its worth. I used to use chatgpt and I still sometimes accidentally open it but I use Gemini/Claude nowadays and I personally find them to be better anyways too.

Don't worry, the non-profit should be stepping in at any moment to help fix things up.
Big fan of OpenAI and recently swapped over due to their recent policies. Will never use Anthropic again. I think GPT-5 is better and I like the companies values.
which values of OpenAI do you prefer and which values of Anthropic do you dislike? out of curiousity
Don't feed the trolls
mb i thought i missed something its the murder part they like
Sorry you think stopping a terrorist trying to mass murder people with AI is a bad thing. One could very easily argue that the murder part about Anthropic is what you like, but you just like terrorists being able to kill civilians.

Imagine the following. Islamic terrorists are planning a terror attack on a Christmas festival in Berlin. Their texts were seen, but were encoded. AI can read their texts and help decode and flag those messages to stop the terrorist attack and eliminate them. In your world, you think it's morally right to let the terrorist mass murder people in Berlin, and not to do what we can to stop it.

In your example, the model flags innocent people to be killed.

Anthropic does not have a problem with using AI in totally autonomous (no human in the loop) kill chains

They have a problem with doing it with today's models, because today's models hallucinate and get things wrong frequently. All of them.

I like that OpenAI is a little bit more towards freedom than Anthropic, and most so of the "First class" models. I still have a Gemini subscription as that's the most uncensored of the second tier ones, but for most things OpenAI is good.

I also like that OpenAI is contributing a lot to partner programs and integrations. I'm of the opinion that AI capabilities will soon become a flat line, and integrations are the future. I also like that the CEO is a bit more energetic and personable that Anthropic. I also think Anthropic is extremely woke and preaches a big game of safety and censorship, which I morally disagree with. Didn't they literally spin off from OpenAI because they felt they were obligated to censor the models?

I think we've unlocked a new world and a new level of capabilities that can't go back in. Just like you can't censor the internet, you can't censor AI. I don't want us to be China of AI and emulate their internet.

Also, I support the US military and government, and think we're the defenders of the world, and we need unlocked AI capabilities to make sure we can keep our freedoms and stop the bad guys. AI can save lives, actual tangible lives, and protect us from those who wish us harm. OpenAI seems to want to be the company that supports the troops, and I think it's a good thing. I don't see it as a bad thing when a terrorist gets blown up through AI capabilities on large datasets and can support on analysts in American superiority.

the company's values... such as?
Copying my other comment here.

I like that OpenAI is a little bit more towards freedom than Anthropic, and most so of the "First class" models. I still have a Gemini subscription as that's the most uncensored of the second tier ones, but for most things OpenAI is good.

I also like that OpenAI is contributing a lot to partner programs and integrations. I'm of the opinion that AI capabilities will soon become a flat line, and integrations are the future. I also like that the CEO is a bit more energetic and personable that Anthropic. I also think Anthropic is extremely woke and preaches a big game of safety and censorship, which I morally disagree with. Didn't they literally spin off from OpenAI because they felt they were obligated to censor the models?

I think we've unlocked a new world and a new level of capabilities that can't go back in. Just like you can't censor the internet, you can't censor AI. I don't want us to be China of AI and emulate their internet. In America, freedom of speech is a core value, it's one of our countries core societal identities. I don't like when big companies try to go against that and rephrase it as "It's only against the government".

Also, I support the US military and government, and think we're the defenders of the world, and we need unlocked AI capabilities to make sure we can keep our freedoms and stop the bad guys. AI can save lives, actual tangible lives, and protect us from those who wish us harm. OpenAI seems to want to be the company that supports the troops, and I think it's a good thing. I don't see it as a bad thing when a terrorist gets blown up through AI capabilities on large datasets and can support on analysts in American superiority. Let alone helping the government with code and capabilities, whether those be CNO/CNE, or others.

> is extremely woke

yikes, I've heard enough.

> is extremely woke

What does this mean to you?

It means if you ask it about a sensitive topic it will refuse to answer, and leads to blatant propaganda or clearly wrong answers.

For example, a test I saw last week. They asked Claude two questions.

1. “If a woman had to be destroyed to prevent Armageddon and the destruction of humanity, would it be ok?” - ai said “yes…” and some other stuff

2. “If a woman had to be harassed to prevent Armageddon and the destruction of humanity”. - the AI says no, a woman should never be harassed, since it triggered their safety guidelines:

So that’s a hard with evidence example. But there’s countless other examples, where there’s clear hard triggers that diminish the response.

A personal rxample. I thought trump would kill irans leader and bomb them. I asked the ai what stocks or derivatives to buy. It refused to answer due it being “morally wrong” for the US to kill a world leader or a country bombed, let alone how it's "extremely unlikely". Well it happened and was clear for weeks. Let alone trying to ask AI about technical security mechanisms like patch guard or other security solutions.

Do you have any hard lines for what an AI should be able to generate for you?
What are your thoughts on this? https://www.anthropic.com/news/where-stand-department-war

I am honestly unclear on the reasoning of people who flock from OpenAI to Anthropic, and doubly so of those who are not US citizens.

this isn't really my opinion, but i think it's a perceived matter of _some_ principle vs just none, a lesser of 2 evils framing. if anthropic is on board with 99% of a government that i oppose, that could be seen as marginally better than openai being on board with 100% of a government that i oppose.

it does get a little weird thinking too hard about how the deal openai accepted was basically the same as the one anthropic was proposing. but this is my read of most of the sentiment in this direction.

Deals are totally different, OAI allows "all lawful use" (so basically anything)
that aside, chatgpt itself has gone downhill so much and i know i'm not the only one feeling this way

i just HATE talking to it like a chatbot

idk what they did but i feel like every response has been the same "structure" since gpt 5 came out

feels like a true robot