11 ms·

"OpenAI was created as an open source (which is why I named it “Open” AI), non-profit company to serve as a counterweight to Google, but now it has become a clo

by lfkdev 4y ago

"OpenAI was created as an open source (which is why I named it “Open” AI), non-profit company to serve as a counterweight to Google, but now it has become a closed source, maximum-profit company effectively controlled by Microsoft. Not what I intended at all." - Elon You can think what you want of Elon, but he is in the right here.

RobotToaster 4y ago
As much as I agree with what he's saying here, it seems a little insincere when all the tesla ai stuff is closed source.
- lfkdev 4y ago
  Since when was Tesla created to be open-source and non-profit?
  - Taek 4y ago
    They did open source all of their battery patents. Tesla isn't Mozilla, but they do have somewhat of a moral high ground to stand on.
    - NewLogic 4y ago
      That is marketing spin, his offer was freely licencing their patents in exchange for free usage from other big automakers which he knew would never happen.
- sebzim4500 4y ago
  Right, and if Tesla was called OpenCars or something it would be entirely reasonable to criticise them on that point.
  - davesque 4y ago
    Isn't that the point though? Tesla in not called OpenSelfDriving because it takes serious cash at this time in history to fund development of that tech. The fact that OpenAI happens to have a name that suggests otherwise doesn't change that fact. And Elon knows that. Therefore, he's just playing the media game right now and trying to detract from their success. Either that or he's just jealous (more likely IMHO) because he can't go along for the ride or claim much real involvement. I say thank God for that. We dodged a collective bullet with that stroke of luck.
    - sebzim4500 4y ago
      If it wasn't feasible for OpenAI to release their model weights and code then they shouldn't have named themselves OpenAI.
      - davesque 4y ago
        On a philosophical level, I agree. But I also recognize that life doesn't always line up nicely with philosophy. In any case, it seems to me that most of the work that led to ChatGPT was done in the open. How ChatGPT works is not really a great mystery.
raincole 4y ago
Yeah, parent comment complains Elon is bashing OpenAI "any opportunity he gets"... while unable to point out how Elon's comment is wrong. Maybe they just wants to express how much they don't like Elon any opportunity they gets.
- narag 4y ago
  He edited the comment and linked relevant tweets. I would add this one: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1630640058507116553 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1630640058507116553 I had no idea about this drama either, so I didn't understand what Elon was talking about, now it seems clear. But "Based"? Is it the name of his new AI company? Where does that come from?
  - permo-w 4y ago
    "Based" is slang for "cool" or "in" that's common on 4chan, but I believe has its origins in the 90s offline on 4chan it's largely used to mean something along the lines of "fitting the 4chan anti-groupthink groupthink"
    - neom 4y ago
      I do recall people saying based a lot in the 90s, it meant based in reality.
      - moralestapia 4y ago
        This is it.
      - permo-w 4y ago
        this sounds much more plausible than the sibling comment's "based on your own beliefs", but plausibility is not necessarily correctness
    - hot_gril 4y ago
      It originally meant "based on your own beliefs," usually in the context of sticking to your guns despite unpopularity. Which is/was the cool thing to express on 4chan.
rvz 4y ago
He is definitely right there. At this point, I consider OpenAI partially acquired by Microsoft, since it is almost majority controlled by them. It is essentially a Microsoft AI division. It is similar to what Microsoft did with Facebook in the early days of slowing acquiring a stake in the company. But this is an aggressive version of that with OpenAI. What you have now is the exact opposite of their original goals in: [0] Before: > Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. [0] After: > Our mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence—AI systems that are generally smarter than humans—benefits all of humanity. [1] The real 'Open AI' is Stability AI, since they are more willing to release their work and AI models rather than OpenAI was supposed to do. [0] https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/ https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/ [1] https://openai.com/blog/planning-for-agi-and-beyond https://openai.com/blog/planning-for-agi-and-beyond
- andrepd 4y ago
  Yeah I'm sure $massive_megacorp with a monopoly on $critical_technology has our best interests at heart. Doesn't anybody read sci-fi anymore??
stefan_ 4y ago
Well, minus the part where it never was Open, even when it was Elon.
mort96 4y ago
I don't understand. He's listed as one of the founders, and I always assumed he had some say. If that's really how he thinks, why wouldn't he have done something? Do we have any reason to believe this isn't just more empty grifting from him to optically distance himself from a unethical company he profits from?
- wodenokoto 4y ago
  Key word being "had". He is not part of it any more. >In 2018, Musk resigned his board seat, citing "a potential future conflict [of interest]" with his role as CEO of Tesla due to Tesla's AI development for self-driving cars, but remained a donor I don't think he counts as an investor, and I'd imagine he has stopped donating.
  - atchoo 4y ago
    The irony here is that Musk resigned in order to pursue his own closed-source for profit AI businesses and is now complaining about OpenAI being closed-source and for profit AI. If people are feeling conflicted about who the asshole is in this situation, don't be, they are all morally bankrupt assholes who all already have many lifetimes of unimaginable wealth yet must take ever more. These are not people who should have any power in our world.
    - dotnet00 4y ago
      The difference is that Tesla isn't claiming to be open about AI.
      - ChickenNugger 4y ago
        And resigning because he was working on a competitor was completely the right thing to do. It would have been a conflict of interest. How often does that type of integrity even happen nowadays? The whole "ELON MUSK BAD NOW" change to the zeitgeist is alarming to me. He was the darling of the left for years because of Tesla and SpaceX, but now he's completely persona non grata for...reasons? It smacks of excommunication for heresy.
numbers_guy 4y ago
He is, but it is weird given the history he has. He was kicked out of Paypal because he wanted to use the MS tech stack instead of LAMP at the time. Now some decades later here he is.
- Idiot_in_Vain 4y ago
  You've got the story wrong. He wasn't kicked out because of the stack debate, but because he sold PP to eBay (making enough money in the process to fund Tesla and SpaceX).
  - sangnoir 4y ago
    How many times was he kicked out?
  - lalos 4y ago
    huh? it was Peter Thiel the acting CEO when the sale was done - right after removing Musk for said migration to MS stack.
    - Idiot_in_Vain 4y ago
      Yeah, I think you're right and I was wrong.
HarHarVeryFunny 4y ago
Well, he's only right in the observation that OpenAI is no longer what it originally claimed it would be (OTOH with a couple of the founders being venture capitalists, one has to wonder how sincere that intention ever was). It seems a bit ironic that "evil" Google openly published the paper ("Attention is all you need") that desribes the "Transformer" architecture that now anyone such as OpenAI with the money and inclination can use to build their own ChatGPT. Turns out it's about money (10,000 GPUs + tons of data to train this thing) not any secret sauce. And now Musk's concern has changed from AI being in too few hands to the fact that it's "woke" so he wants to create another AI company to create the racist/threatening non-woke AI that he thinks the world needs. Or, at least the one that he needs, to keep himself at the center of attention.
fundad 4y ago
We'd have to believe that he means what he said about starting the company. Maybe he meant it, maybe it was just corporate philanthropy BS. Which do you think is really the case?
- Eisenstein 4y ago
  Do we even believe that he was the one who came up with the name?
  - fundad 4y ago
    Probably not, I don't believe they ever meant it to be non-commercial.
davesque 4y ago
Yes, he's technically correct. But it's pretty obvious he's really just jealous. Inferring that from his past behavior is not rocket science, as they say.

by lfkdev 4y ago

RobotToaster 4y ago

As much as I agree with what he's saying here, it seems a little insincere when all the tesla ai stuff is closed source.

lfkdev 4y ago
Since when was Tesla created to be open-source and non-profit?
- Taek 4y ago
  They did open source all of their battery patents. Tesla isn't Mozilla, but they do have somewhat of a moral high ground to stand on.
  - NewLogic 4y ago
    That is marketing spin, his offer was freely licencing their patents in exchange for free usage from other big automakers which he knew would never happen.
sebzim4500 4y ago
Right, and if Tesla was called OpenCars or something it would be entirely reasonable to criticise them on that point.
- davesque 4y ago
  Isn't that the point though? Tesla in not called OpenSelfDriving because it takes serious cash at this time in history to fund development of that tech. The fact that OpenAI happens to have a name that suggests otherwise doesn't change that fact. And Elon knows that. Therefore, he's just playing the media game right now and trying to detract from their success. Either that or he's just jealous (more likely IMHO) because he can't go along for the ride or claim much real involvement. I say thank God for that. We dodged a collective bullet with that stroke of luck.
  - sebzim4500 4y ago
    If it wasn't feasible for OpenAI to release their model weights and code then they shouldn't have named themselves OpenAI.
    - davesque 4y ago
      On a philosophical level, I agree. But I also recognize that life doesn't always line up nicely with philosophy. In any case, it seems to me that most of the work that led to ChatGPT was done in the open. How ChatGPT works is not really a great mystery.

raincole 4y ago

Yeah, parent comment complains Elon is bashing OpenAI "any opportunity he gets"... while unable to point out how Elon's comment is wrong. Maybe they just wants to express how much they don't like Elon any opportunity they gets.

narag 4y ago
He edited the comment and linked relevant tweets. I would add this one: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1630640058507116553 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1630640058507116553 I had no idea about this drama either, so I didn't understand what Elon was talking about, now it seems clear. But "Based"? Is it the name of his new AI company? Where does that come from?
- permo-w 4y ago
  "Based" is slang for "cool" or "in" that's common on 4chan, but I believe has its origins in the 90s offline on 4chan it's largely used to mean something along the lines of "fitting the 4chan anti-groupthink groupthink"
  - neom 4y ago
    I do recall people saying based a lot in the 90s, it meant based in reality.
    - moralestapia 4y ago
      This is it.
    - permo-w 4y ago
      this sounds much more plausible than the sibling comment's "based on your own beliefs", but plausibility is not necessarily correctness
  - hot_gril 4y ago
    It originally meant "based on your own beliefs," usually in the context of sticking to your guns despite unpopularity. Which is/was the cool thing to express on 4chan.

rvz 4y ago

He is definitely right there. At this point, I consider OpenAI partially acquired by Microsoft, since it is almost majority controlled by them. It is essentially a Microsoft AI division. It is similar to what Microsoft did with Facebook in the early days of slowing acquiring a stake in the company. But this is an aggressive version of that with OpenAI. What you have now is the exact opposite of their original goals in: [0] Before: > Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. [0] After: > Our mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence—AI systems that are generally smarter than humans—benefits all of humanity. [1] The real 'Open AI' is Stability AI, since they are more willing to release their work and AI models rather than OpenAI was supposed to do. [0] https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/ https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/ [1] https://openai.com/blog/planning-for-agi-and-beyond https://openai.com/blog/planning-for-agi-and-beyond

andrepd 4y ago
Yeah I'm sure $massive_megacorp with a monopoly on $critical_technology has our best interests at heart. Doesn't anybody read sci-fi anymore??

stefan_ 4y ago

Well, minus the part where it never was Open, even when it was Elon.

mort96 4y ago

I don't understand. He's listed as one of the founders, and I always assumed he had some say. If that's really how he thinks, why wouldn't he have done something? Do we have any reason to believe this isn't just more empty grifting from him to optically distance himself from a unethical company he profits from?

wodenokoto 4y ago
Key word being "had". He is not part of it any more. >In 2018, Musk resigned his board seat, citing "a potential future conflict [of interest]" with his role as CEO of Tesla due to Tesla's AI development for self-driving cars, but remained a donor I don't think he counts as an investor, and I'd imagine he has stopped donating.
- atchoo 4y ago
  The irony here is that Musk resigned in order to pursue his own closed-source for profit AI businesses and is now complaining about OpenAI being closed-source and for profit AI. If people are feeling conflicted about who the asshole is in this situation, don't be, they are all morally bankrupt assholes who all already have many lifetimes of unimaginable wealth yet must take ever more. These are not people who should have any power in our world.
  - dotnet00 4y ago
    The difference is that Tesla isn't claiming to be open about AI.
    - ChickenNugger 4y ago
      And resigning because he was working on a competitor was completely the right thing to do. It would have been a conflict of interest. How often does that type of integrity even happen nowadays? The whole "ELON MUSK BAD NOW" change to the zeitgeist is alarming to me. He was the darling of the left for years because of Tesla and SpaceX, but now he's completely persona non grata for...reasons? It smacks of excommunication for heresy.

numbers_guy 4y ago

He is, but it is weird given the history he has. He was kicked out of Paypal because he wanted to use the MS tech stack instead of LAMP at the time. Now some decades later here he is.

Idiot_in_Vain 4y ago
You've got the story wrong. He wasn't kicked out because of the stack debate, but because he sold PP to eBay (making enough money in the process to fund Tesla and SpaceX).
- sangnoir 4y ago
  How many times was he kicked out?
- lalos 4y ago
  huh? it was Peter Thiel the acting CEO when the sale was done - right after removing Musk for said migration to MS stack.
  - Idiot_in_Vain 4y ago
    Yeah, I think you're right and I was wrong.

HarHarVeryFunny 4y ago

Well, he's only right in the observation that OpenAI is no longer what it originally claimed it would be (OTOH with a couple of the founders being venture capitalists, one has to wonder how sincere that intention ever was). It seems a bit ironic that "evil" Google openly published the paper ("Attention is all you need") that desribes the "Transformer" architecture that now anyone such as OpenAI with the money and inclination can use to build their own ChatGPT. Turns out it's about money (10,000 GPUs + tons of data to train this thing) not any secret sauce. And now Musk's concern has changed from AI being in too few hands to the fact that it's "woke" so he wants to create another AI company to create the racist/threatening non-woke AI that he thinks the world needs. Or, at least the one that he needs, to keep himself at the center of attention.

fundad 4y ago

We'd have to believe that he means what he said about starting the company. Maybe he meant it, maybe it was just corporate philanthropy BS. Which do you think is really the case?

Eisenstein 4y ago
Do we even believe that he was the one who came up with the name?
- fundad 4y ago
  Probably not, I don't believe they ever meant it to be non-commercial.

davesque 4y ago

Yes, he's technically correct. But it's pretty obvious he's really just jealous. Inferring that from his past behavior is not rocket science, as they say.