Comment by pffft8888 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by pffft8888 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

In addition,

1) it's open source.

2) you can run it yourself so the rug won't be pulled from under you when they decide to shutdown and move users up to the next version or another product as they've done with the older text-davinci models.

3) you get to align it (using RLFH) as opposed to a corporation dictating what is "aligned" and what is "safe."

4) you won't have to deal with government led censorship. For example, instead of the FBI using JIRA to manage a list of URLs to be censored (as they did according to the latest revelations) they can train the AI to self-censor as Bing has done.

5) you won't be using the product of a company that was started as a non-profit with $100M donation (from Elon Musk) to promote transparent AI only to take that money and turn into a for-profit company and close-source the AI.

Sources:

Elon is the source for #5 and Matt Taibbi is the source for #4. I doub't you'll have a problem sourcing #5 so here is the source for #4:

"31. After the 2020 election, when EIP was renamed the Virality Project, the Stanford lab was on-boarded to Twitter’s JIRA ticketing system, absorbing this government proxy into Twitter infrastructure – with a capability of taking in an incredible 50 million tweets a day." --Matt Taibbi on Twitter https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1633830104144183298

I think that your first few points are fair, but I was a little confused about #4.

I had never heard of this, and it seemed important, some cursory research turned up many twitter posts from individuals amplifying your version of events.

I also found a write up on the situation from TechDirt[0]. The article is fairly good and well sourced, but it paints a substantially different picture than what you describe.

[0]https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/extraordinarily-confused...

"It’s crucial to reiterate: EIP was partnered with state entities like CISA and GEC while seeking elimination of millions of tweets. In the #Twitter Files, Twitter execs did not distinguish between organizations, using phrases like ‘According to CIS[A], escalated via EIP,’" Taibbi wrote. "After the 2020 election, when EIP was renamed the Virality Project, the Stanford lab was on-boarded to Twitter’s JIRA ticketing system, absorbing this government proxy into Twitter infrastructure – with a capability of taking in an incredible 50 million tweets a day.

from the source:

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1633830104144183298

"31. After the 2020 election, when EIP was renamed the Virality Project, the Stanford lab was on-boarded to Twitter’s JIRA ticketing system, absorbing this government proxy into Twitter infrastructure – with a capability of taking in an incredible 50 million tweets a day."

You raised spectacularly important points.

You make it sounds like Elon single-handedly started the venture and provided all the funds. In fact, there are were at least 5 individual founders, plus 3 organizations that together pledged $1 billion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI#2015%E2%80%932018:_Non-...

Elon, not me, made it sound like that. Let's not distract from the core argument though... took money in for non-profit for transparency in AI research and turned around and made it for profit and super anti-transparent. But that's just saying why I can't trust him (sama) The rest of the reasons are not about him and of significant importance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com