I've read that the founders did honestly want to make an Open AI company when they started OpenAI, but that business model didn't work out (wow, what a surprise) so they were forced to switch to being not-Open. Regardless of whether you believe that, the "Open" part of their name has been extremely misleading for a long time. But the average person doesn't know that; they see that the company is called OpenAI and don't question the Open part.
I'm not a lawyer and I don't know what the law allows regulators to do, but I wouldn't mind if the government forced ClosedAI to change its name under some sort of truth in advertising law.
More importantly, we tech folks have specialized knowledge and it's our responsibility to not propagate harmful, deceptive propaganda like the OpenAI name. Especially for something as widely known and culturally relevant as ClosedAI. I've personally been calling it ClosedAI for a while now. When people ask I give them a quick 5 second explanation.
Another example, much less bad than ClosedAI, is "iPhone." It's not your phone, you don't control it. Apple can run and inject whatever code they want onto your ("i") Phone, and you can't make the phone run software which isn't approved by Apple. I personally refer to it as an ApplePhone (and ApplePad, Apple Mobile OS instead of iOS, etc.). I'll admit this is a pretty weak example; the name clearly has non-nefarious origins. But in the modern day, at a subtle psychological level, it's still misleading in an Orwellian sort of way. And it brings up a good opportunity to give "normal" people a quick 15-second intro to software freedom.
In a way, the damage done to the word "open" is even more egregious - because OpenAI allowed people to access a SaaS product, for free, many people will now see the Open prefix as "you're allowed to play on my land."
The entire notion of "open source" will start to blur with "source-available" and even with "freemium SaaS" in the minds of an entire generation using a closed product called OpenAI to do their homework. How does OpenOffice distinguish itself from Google Docs when the word "open" means nothing? (Yes, LibreOffice, I see you there, but sadly your "fetch" is not going to happen in the English speaking world!)
One might say, "non-programmers don't need to know this" - but of course they do. They should know that a product that is truly open is guaranteed to be available so long as a community wants it to be - not at the whims of a corporation that could take away a freemium tier or revoke someone's ability to build code derived from a source-available license at will. And I fear this will take at least some wind out of the sails of a lot of incredible projects.
> Another example, much less bad than OpenAI, is "iPhone." It's not your phone, you don't control it. Apple can run and inject whatever code they want onto your ("i") Phone
To the extent that the “i” means anything at all it does stand for “internet”.
Aha, I've also resorted to replacing the syllable "smart" with "spy" in the names of devices (since the difference between a "normal/dumb" device and a "smart" device is always that the "smart" device's business model is being subsidized by grabbing your data).
But it's a lost battle, isn't it? :) We're tilting at windmills.
I think the "ClosedAI" jokes have been pretty boring since before the first person even made them. Every comment thread has at least 4 people making it
Becomes? It has always be a horrible branding. Like if Shell or competitors called themselves carbonfree. An insult to everyone working on open software.
But of course the page is fake/parody, so the misattribution continues. Well, it fits well to the Microsoft we knew 10-20 years ago.
Don't poke fun at my CarbonFreeChainGPT initiative... we're using AI and blockchain to push the boundaries of AI for the use of proven reduction of carbon emissions and spreading the good works of ESG globally. We're hoping to receive $2B in initial funding.
Edit: note, we're also using our own technology to point out and apply for patents that include the combined usage of our exclusive technology in order to protect our creative investments.
My sarcasm detector is usually better than most, but there is no way a sarcasm seeking person can tell if this is fact or fiction. Renaming OpenAI to ClosedAI actually makes sense, given they are not open.
If this is parody, I think there is a good chance it's libel.
Edit: I now see every link on the page redirects to the vice article.
That is a smart troll website and SEO/marketing strategy.
I think the underlying challenge is not going to be easily solved.
If the ChatGPT API is indeed more powerful than `text-davinci-003`, then the predatory pricing creates a ton of incentives towards trust monopoly territory. Why would our apps struggle to put up a BLOOM or GPT-NeoX instance if it ends up more expensive?
This is possibly going to be one of the most egregious, hard-to-resist traps of our time.
The idea of founding "OpenAI" was: Make AI an extension of human wills in the spirit of liberty, as broadly and evenly distributed as is possible safely. The idea was that if we empower people evenly, any evil people powered by AI would not be able to do a 51% attack on the people empowered by AIs collectively.
Now, suppose you "Open" the OpenAI, by giving the information about the model and data, all of that -- the only ones who would empower by that kind of openness -- is the very large corporations and the governments of powerful countries rather than people evenly.
So, while distributing the AI power evenly in the society ("democratize AI") was the original motivation of OpenAI group, and founding it as a non-profit may have motivated researchers and capable engineers join the effort, the reason why it isn't staying "open" is simply, because they had not yet figured out how to "Empower people evenly", rather than empower large governments and corporations through such openness.
Additionally, Microsoft has for a long time been embraced by the world's governments as a solution to dealing with the official matters, most of the world's governments are users of it with access to the source code (Government Security Program (GSP)), and trust Microsoft to a high degree. Such trust may be important as a kind of justification for the world's governments that this AI is safe hands, however, obviously, every larger government is strategizing in their back-offices the implications of such AI to their security... and when AI becomes a strategic weapon, you bet it can't easily be open.
The word "fraud" has really lost its punch these last couple years. OpenAI has actual, working products that people think are valuable enough to pay for. The name is misleading, sure, but that doesn't make them a fraudulent company.
Is there a word for the opposite of the euphemism treadmill, where people call ordinary things by worse and worse names trying to get an emotional reaction out of people?
I'm sorry but from an outside perspective of a foreigner living in the US... Integrity has never been something that comes to mind when I think of this country.
Business, money and profits first. Whatever goes.
And it's fine, that's how y'all are as a country. So far it worked.
Comparison to an election is a weak argument. Elections are a choice between two things. And just because you don't hear the news in your cave doesn't mean the reporting wasn't there. And lastly he tried to take away my democratic right to vote. Nothing will ever excuse that.
the_pwner224|3 years ago
I'm not a lawyer and I don't know what the law allows regulators to do, but I wouldn't mind if the government forced ClosedAI to change its name under some sort of truth in advertising law.
More importantly, we tech folks have specialized knowledge and it's our responsibility to not propagate harmful, deceptive propaganda like the OpenAI name. Especially for something as widely known and culturally relevant as ClosedAI. I've personally been calling it ClosedAI for a while now. When people ask I give them a quick 5 second explanation.
Another example, much less bad than ClosedAI, is "iPhone." It's not your phone, you don't control it. Apple can run and inject whatever code they want onto your ("i") Phone, and you can't make the phone run software which isn't approved by Apple. I personally refer to it as an ApplePhone (and ApplePad, Apple Mobile OS instead of iOS, etc.). I'll admit this is a pretty weak example; the name clearly has non-nefarious origins. But in the modern day, at a subtle psychological level, it's still misleading in an Orwellian sort of way. And it brings up a good opportunity to give "normal" people a quick 15-second intro to software freedom.
btown|3 years ago
The entire notion of "open source" will start to blur with "source-available" and even with "freemium SaaS" in the minds of an entire generation using a closed product called OpenAI to do their homework. How does OpenOffice distinguish itself from Google Docs when the word "open" means nothing? (Yes, LibreOffice, I see you there, but sadly your "fetch" is not going to happen in the English speaking world!)
One might say, "non-programmers don't need to know this" - but of course they do. They should know that a product that is truly open is guaranteed to be available so long as a community wants it to be - not at the whims of a corporation that could take away a freemium tier or revoke someone's ability to build code derived from a source-available license at will. And I fear this will take at least some wind out of the sails of a lot of incredible projects.
kgwgk|3 years ago
To the extent that the “i” means anything at all it does stand for “internet”.
sebastiennight|3 years ago
But it's a lost battle, isn't it? :) We're tilting at windmills.
sebastiansm|3 years ago
AndrewHart|3 years ago
fparlane|3 years ago
This is a clever piece of marketing by Vice!
petilon|3 years ago
beeboop|3 years ago
usr1106|3 years ago
But of course the page is fake/parody, so the misattribution continues. Well, it fits well to the Microsoft we knew 10-20 years ago.
tracker1|3 years ago
Edit: note, we're also using our own technology to point out and apply for patents that include the combined usage of our exclusive technology in order to protect our creative investments.
RobotToaster|3 years ago
BP officially rebranded to "beyond petroleum".
super_linear|3 years ago
> This organization has no public repositories.
A nice touch
randyrand|3 years ago
If this is parody, I think there is a good chance it's libel.
Edit: I now see every link on the page redirects to the vice article.
talos2110|3 years ago
“Acknowledgments This piece of satire was possible with the help of ChatGPT.”
sebastiennight|3 years ago
I think the underlying challenge is not going to be easily solved.
If the ChatGPT API is indeed more powerful than `text-davinci-003`, then the predatory pricing creates a ton of incentives towards trust monopoly territory. Why would our apps struggle to put up a BLOOM or GPT-NeoX instance if it ends up more expensive?
This is possibly going to be one of the most egregious, hard-to-resist traps of our time.
Mindey|3 years ago
Now, suppose you "Open" the OpenAI, by giving the information about the model and data, all of that -- the only ones who would empower by that kind of openness -- is the very large corporations and the governments of powerful countries rather than people evenly.
So, while distributing the AI power evenly in the society ("democratize AI") was the original motivation of OpenAI group, and founding it as a non-profit may have motivated researchers and capable engineers join the effort, the reason why it isn't staying "open" is simply, because they had not yet figured out how to "Empower people evenly", rather than empower large governments and corporations through such openness.
Mindey|3 years ago
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
tromp|3 years ago
Fun satire?!
kouteiheika|3 years ago
> This piece of satire was possible with the help of ChatGPT.
marcosdumay|3 years ago
IMO, a bit late. This is known for a few years already. But that doesn't make it wrong.
rvz|3 years ago
Replace OpenAI with 'Microsoft® AI'. It is still the same and accurate.
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
kundi|3 years ago
UberFly|3 years ago
tectonic|3 years ago
akagusu|3 years ago
jalino23|3 years ago
yazzku|3 years ago
rom-antics|3 years ago
Is there a word for the opposite of the euphemism treadmill, where people call ordinary things by worse and worse names trying to get an emotional reaction out of people?
Mistletoe|3 years ago
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
Laaas|3 years ago
thedonkeycometh|3 years ago
[deleted]
finikytou|3 years ago
[deleted]
courgette|3 years ago
I'm sorry but from an outside perspective of a foreigner living in the US... Integrity has never been something that comes to mind when I think of this country. Business, money and profits first. Whatever goes.
And it's fine, that's how y'all are as a country. So far it worked.
sixothree|3 years ago