You know guys, I’m starting to think what we heard about Altman when he was removed a while ago might actually have been real.
/s
I wonder if all those people who supported him like the taste of their feet.
There’s an alternate timeline where the non-profit side of the company won, Altman the Conman was booted and exposed, and OpenAI kept developing machine learning in a way that actually benefits actual use cases.
Cancer screenings approved by a doctor could be accurate enough to save so many lives and so much suffering through early detection.
Instead, Altman turned a promising technology into a meme stock with a product released too early to ever fix properly.
No, there isn’t really any such alternate timeline. Good honest causes are not profitable enough to survive against the startup scams. Even if the non-profit side won internally, OpenAI would just be left behind, funding would go to its competitors, and OpenAI would shut down. Unless you mean a radically different alternate timeline where our economic system is fundamentally different.
I mean wikipedia managed to do it. It just requires honest people to retain control long enough. I think it was allowed to happen in wikipedia’s case because the wealthiest/greediest people hadn’t caught on to the potential yet.
There’s probably an alternate timeline where wikipedia is a social network with paid verification by corporate interests who write articles about their own companies and state-funded accounts spreading conspiracy theories.
AI models can outmatch most oncologists and radiologists in recognition of early tumor stages in MRI and CT scans.
Further developing this strength could lead to earlier diagnosis with less-invasive methods saving not only countless live and prolonging the remaining quality life time for the individual but also save a shit ton of money.
That is a different kind of machine learning model, though.
You can’t just plug in your pathology images into their multimodal generative models, and expect it to pop out something usable.
And those image recognition models aren’t something OpenAI is currently working on, iirc.
Wasn’t it proven that AI was having amazing results, because it noticed the cancer screens had doctors signature at the bottom? Or did they make another run with signatures hidden?
Putting my tin foil hat on… Sam Altman knows the AI train might be slowing down soon.
The OpenAI brand is the most valuable part of the company right now, since the models from Google, Anthropic, etc. can beat or match what ChatGPT is, but they aren’t taking off coz they aren’t as cool as OpenAI.
The business models to train & run models is not sustainable. If there is any money to be made it is NOW, while the speculation is highest. The nonprofit is just getting in the way.
This could be wishful thinking coz fuck corporate AI, but no one can deny AI is in a speculative bubble.
Take the hat off. This was the goal. Whoops, gotta cash in and leave! I’m sure it’s super great, but I’m gone.
That’s an excellent point! Why oh why would a tech bro start a non-profit? Its always been PR.
It honestly just never occurred to me that such a transformation was allowed/possible. A nonprofit seems to imply something charitable, though obviously that’s not the true meaning of it. Still, it would almost seem like the company benefits from the goodwill that comes with being a nonprofit but then gets to transform that goodwill into real gains when they drop the act and cease being a nonprofit.
I don’t really understand most of this shit though, so I’m probably missing some key component that makes it make a lot more sense.
ai is such a dead end. it can’t operate without a constant inflow of human creations, and people are trying to replace human creations with AI. it’s fundamentally unsustainable. I am counting the days until the ai bubble pops and everyone can move on. although AI generated images, video, and audio will still probably be abused for the foreseeable future. (propaganda, porn, etc)
That is a good point, but I think I’d like to make the distinction of saying LLM’s or “generic model” is a garbage concept, which require power & water rivaling a small country to produce incorrect results.
Neural networks in general that can (cheaply) learn on their own for a specific task could be huge! But there’s no big money in that, since its not a consolidated general purpose product tech bros can flog to average consumers.
I’m sure they were dead weight. I trust open AI completely and all tech gurus named Sam. Btw, what happened to that Crypto guy? He seemed so nice.
I’m confused, how can a company that’s gained numerous advantages from being non-profit just switch to a for-profit model? Weren’t a lot of the advantages (like access to data and scraping) given with the stipulation that it’s for a non-profit? This sounds like it should be illegal to my brain
Careful you’re making too much sense here and overlapping with Elmo’s view on the subject
Money doesn’t have any advantages in other countries? When did that happen?
Their non-profit status had nothing to do with the legality of their training data acquisition methods. Some of it was still legal and some of it was still illegal (torrenting a bunch of books off a piracy site).
