Hacker News Reader

Comment by nothrowaways | Hacker News Reader

Llama 2 is still the most transparent and open source model.

That's absolutely false. It's trivial to prove that OpenLlama is both more transparent (details on how it's trained), and more open (better license, and public training code).

Llama 2 doesn't even mention the dataset used, so it's not very transparent.

even if this is true, to be fair to elon he donated to openai when it was a nonprofit and through some sketchy moves it was turned into a for-profit company where his donation should now be seen as an investment

To be fair to OpenAI, Musk determined that OpenAI had irreparably lost the race to Google and proposed that he be made CEO [0]. Musk's public complaints about OpenAI being profitable were years[1] after he had decided to abandon OpenAI.

> But in early 2018, Musk told Sam Altman, another OpenAI founder, that he believed the venture had fallen fatally behind Google, people familiar with the matter said.

> And Musk proposed a possible solution: He would take control of OpenAI and run it himself.

> Altman and OpenAI’s other founders rejected Musk’s proposal. Musk, in turn, walked away from the company — and reneged on a massive planned donation. The fallout from that conflict, culminating in the announcement of Musk’s departure on Feb 20, 2018, would shape the industry that’s changing the world, and the company at the heart of it.

[0] https://www.semafor.com/article/03/24/2023/the-secret-histor...

[1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1626516035863212034?s=20

> Musk determined

That's a pretty strong way of stating what's basically hearsay from a pretty low effort article.

Not a fan of elon, but it was the bad old Micro$oft that turned OpenAI for-profit.

is there any evidence of this?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com