←back to thread

614 points nickthegreek | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.252s | source
Show context
mgreg ◴[] 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 #
RespectYourself ◴[] No.39122633[source]
OpenAI: pioneer in the field of fraudulently putting "open" in your name and being anything but.
replies(5): >>39122838 #>>39126517 #>>39127309 #>>39130117 #>>39132836 #
quantum_state ◴[] No.39122838[source]
Similar naming pattern, like North Korea calls itself “ Democratic People's Republic of Korea” … it cannot be further from being democratic.
replies(4): >>39122913 #>>39123123 #>>39123586 #>>39124478 #
pphysch ◴[] No.39123586[source]
Suppose there was a country where individualism was prioritized. Having your own opinions, avoiding "groupthink", even disagreeing with others, is a point of pride.

Suppose there was a country where collectivism was prioritized. Harmony, conformity and agreeing with others is a point of pride.

Suppose both countries have similar government structures that allow ~everyone to vote. Would it really be surprising that the first country regularly has 50-50 splits, and the second country has virtually unanimous 100-0 voting outcomes? Is that outcome enough basis to judge whether one is "democratic" or not?

replies(2): >>39124248 #>>39126262 #
1. falcor84 ◴[] No.39124248[source]
Suppose that countries have more than two parties...
replies(2): >>39126412 #>>39131707 #
2. s1artibartfast ◴[] No.39126412[source]
You can democratically decide to have only two parties, or for that matter only one.

It only takes 51% of the vote to outlaw opposition.

Just recently, the US democratic convention stripped all the voters in New Hampshire from their votes the presidential candidates.

3. pphysch ◴[] No.39131707[source]
Even in multi-party systems, it comes down to ruling coalition vs. opposition. DPRK technically has multiple parties, but they are in a tight coalition.