After reading a bit into it, I can't seem to grasp what the "open" in OpenAI is referring to, as it's main codebase is in no way, shape or form, open in any way.
It was originally meant to be a non profit, funded by a bunch of really rich people. Turns out that they didn't have enough money to get to AGI and Elon wasn't willing to fund enough of it, rather preferring to develop AI at Tesla.
So they went for profit, then doubled down and got into bed with Microsoft. There's a cap on profit though, a limit on ROI that investors can take. Past that point it goes back into the non profit organisation.
There is some openness though - they purposely made ChatGPT mostly free and the API extremely cheap so that it's accessible to everyone, not just the rich.
Imagine a food company sells a food that they say it has a "great new taste" but really it tastes bad. How could they do such a thing? I can't wrap my head around it. I must be missing something.
Nah, it should be mentioned as often as possible, like Mark Zuckerberg stating They "trust me". Dumb fucks. Only appropriate drawing attention when an organization is deceiving.
What is the incentive of corporate apologists such as this to come in and defend a company that they have no equity in and that might monopolize LLMs causing tears in societies?
muzani|2 years ago
So they went for profit, then doubled down and got into bed with Microsoft. There's a cap on profit though, a limit on ROI that investors can take. Past that point it goes back into the non profit organisation.
There is some openness though - they purposely made ChatGPT mostly free and the API extremely cheap so that it's accessible to everyone, not just the rich.
ftxbro|2 years ago
smoldesu|2 years ago
jstx1|2 years ago
What you're missing is how dead this horse is.
planter|2 years ago
Nah, it should be mentioned as often as possible, like Mark Zuckerberg stating They "trust me". Dumb fucks. Only appropriate drawing attention when an organization is deceiving.
meghan_rain|2 years ago