←back to thread

OpenAI scrapped a promise to disclose key documents to the public

(www.wired.com)
614 points nickthegreek | 5 comments | 24 Jan 24 19:21 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mgreg ◴[24 Jan 24 19:55 UTC] No.39121867[source]▶
Unsurprising but disappointing none-the-less. Let’s just try to learn from it.

It’s popular in the AI space to claim altruism and openness; OpenAI, Anthropic and xAI (the new Musk one) all have a funky governance structure because they want to be a public good. The challenge is once any of these (or others) start to gain enough traction that they are seen as having a good chance at reaping billions in profits things change.

And it’s not just AI companies and this isn’t new. This is art of human nature and will always be.

We should be putting more emphasis and attention on truly open AI models (open training data, training source code & hyperparameters, model source code, weights) so the benefits of AI accrue to the public and not just a few companies.

[edit - eliminated specific company mentions]

replies(17): >>39122377 #>>39122548 #>>39122564 #>>39122633 #>>39122672 #>>39122681 #>>39122683 #>>39122910 #>>39123084 #>>39123321 #>>39124167 #>>39124930 #>>39125603 #>>39126566 #>>39126621 #>>39127428 #>>39132151 #
1. skottenborg ◴[24 Jan 24 20:57 UTC] No.39122548[source]▶
Given this, it's interesting that an established company like Meta releases open source models. Just the other day Zuck mentioned an upcoming open source model being trained with a tremendous amount of GPU-power.
replies(4): >>39125779 #>>39126425 #>>39126431 #>>39132989 #
2. dotnet00 ◴[25 Jan 24 03:01 UTC] No.39125779[source]▶
I think that's just them trying to limit what the others can get away with, as well as limiting the competition they have to deal with because the open source models end up as a baseline.

OpenAI etc have to reign in how much they abuse their lead because after some price point it becomes better to take the quality hit and use an open source model. Similarly, new competitors are forced to treat the Facebook models as a baseline, which increases their costs.

3. mastax ◴[25 Jan 24 05:18 UTC] No.39126425[source]▶
Commoditize your complement. I guess Meta sees AI more as something they use than something they offer.
4. willvarfar ◴[25 Jan 24 05:19 UTC] No.39126431[source]▶
Meta is trying to devalue its upstart competitor openai. When openai was so far ahead in public perception, FB starts gaving away what they had spent oodles of money building in order to lessen openai's hype and stop their investors believing that the next great thing was elsewhere?
5. insane_dreamer ◴[25 Jan 24 18:37 UTC] No.39132989[source]▶
it was the only way for Meta to even get into the conversation; if they had captured the mindshare like GPT did, you can be sure they wouldn't have open-sourced it