Since OpenAI is a "capped-profit" company [1], the employees and investors only get up to 100X their initial investment. Anything beyond that would still go to the OpenAI non-profit. It seems like a reasonable compromise, however, the massive Microsoft investment does concern me.
This assumes that the returns are not laundered via some other method as the non-profit board decides makes sense; for example, below market rates to entities owned by the board or their significant partners.
Most troubling aspect to me is that OpenAI goal is to create AGI that exist for OpenAI sole control. Non-profit or not, AGIs shouldn’t be controlled by anyone.
“Capped profit at X multiple of investment” is generally isomorphic to “For-profit for Y years”, right? There’s a big difference between “we’re only being a little bit for-profit” and “we’re only being for-profit for a little bit”, and capped-profit is the latter while implying it’s the former.
I'm willing to praise Musk to the extent that he's consistently advocated for getting out in front of dangerous AI, and brought it to public attention as one of the gravest dangers facing our survival. That being said, it seems inevitable that companies like OpenAI will close and rent their models - and have perfectly good cover for doing so, as democratizing them would potentially bring even worse dangers than their control falling to megacorps. In the end this is all irrelevant, as demonstrated by Dall-E, because there's no real moat to competition. All you need is massive compute and investment.
[+] [-] flat-pluto|3 years ago|reply
[1] - https://openai.com/blog/openai-lp/
[+] [-] O__________O|3 years ago|reply
Most troubling aspect to me is that OpenAI goal is to create AGI that exist for OpenAI sole control. Non-profit or not, AGIs shouldn’t be controlled by anyone.
[+] [-] fwlr|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] noduerme|3 years ago|reply