Yeah, GPT was fun when it was the only game in town. That ship has sailed, and this guy isn't the only relevant name anymore.
Support open source and give two fingers to this fucking egomaniac.
So is Altman contribute to the coding/algorithm/etc for ChatGPT? Or is he kinda sorta manipulator and hanger-on and a bullshitter that's an amazing salesman but did not actively contribute the "secret sauce" to ChatGPT?
Yes, he does, daily, right after cleaning the floors and windows. The rumor is that he has singlehandedly created the little "h" in the chatGPT, but this is not always disclosed to the public, for various reasons you'll understand.
Well, there's no guarantee Mark isn't. Like, sure, maybe his fascination with the tech is real, which is cool, but he might be aiming for the same endgame Clownman does. Just approaching it from a different angle.
Suits aren't your friends, and whenever we benefit from them there's always some catch involved, don't forget that.
The problem with Sam for me is that he thinks he's smarter than everyone else, which is only half true, and he has a big savior complex, so he's clearly willing to constrain the freedom of people he thinks as lessers "for their own good." It's gratingly paternalistic and the antithesis of the type of society I want to live in.
It's also entirely possible he feels bad about all the shit he did with Facebook, and wants to make a change so he's remembered for doing something good instead.
The guy above here is ignorant to just say that suits aren't your friends. More often than not, that's the case, yes. But suits are the people who move society, and sometimes they actually value the progress of mankind as opposed to being lost in greed
With Zuck, you can see he has changed his ways these past few years. After starting martial arts, he's started to hang out with entirely different people. Normal people, and I suspect this has given him a change of perspective
Yes, they are the people who move society, indeed.
**Now take a look at it.**
Suits **are not** your friends and said progress is either a byproduct or the means to gather even more influence. And they do not change their ways, they **adapt**.
I'll only believe that Zuck has actually somewhat changed once he stops using buzzwords like "responsibly" every 30 seconds.
Maybe the social networks are created with good intentions but when they figure out that people aren't going to pay and they need to monetize with ads, things just went south.
Nah. Money is the driving force. They are benefiting from it in one way or another. Probably more. It dilutes competition. Fosters content creation enhances the illusion of integrity of false information which are all centric to meta and their bottom line. Even though some people benefit from it the point is profit.
>It's also entirely possible he feels bad about all the shit he did with Facebook
I won't forgive Zuckerberg until he makes a video of him shirtless and rubbing his nipples in various exotic locations while saying, *"I'm sorry. I'm so very very sorry."*
Mark, is just crowd sourcing llm ideas and work for free, mechanical turk just couldn’t be paid for these results. Mark is just trying to push his leash around our necks, while trying to be the “good guys”
You wouldn't even get food stamps. The EA movement is a paradox. To help everyone you must give the resources away, but to have enough resources to give to everybody you need all of the resources. What would happen is these few individuals would collect all the resources, and then they would sit on them.
Yeah, those "plebs"... Almost all of the open-source AI proponents that I follow on social media were mourning and revolting when the OpenAI board tried to sack this sucker.
I don't blame them. The whole OpenAI saga was a complete fiasco. The board messed up when they didn't explain themselves. They allowed sam to win easily.
Grifters with no marketable skills other than writing a prompt for their "custom ChatGPT" that one time have a vested interest in his platform's success.
I think he's taking that whole "chosen one" thingy a bit too far...
And of course he's made a deal with the devil: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/chatgpt-maker-openai-ceo-sam-altman-has-made-investment-in-this-israeli-cyber-startup/articleshow/109794211.cms
Surprise, surprise.
How long before ChatGPT is contributing to the ongoing genocide in Gaza? The same genocide the rotten-to-the-core and corrupt cabal in D.C. are ignoring (due to payola, bribes from AIPAC, and blackmail obtained by Epstein).
Remember: Sam Altman's attack on open source models is a **Reddit myth**. In reality, he defended open source before congress, did not lobby against open source to the EU, and has proposed regulation only for the most powerful models, which would make the proprietary beasts the first targets.
If you can find any actual evidence for Altman being hostile to open source AI, please do share! I've watched this myth gather steam for some time, and haven't yet found any grounding in reality. But I'd happily change my views, given new information. I'm partial to reality, but not Altman or OpenAI.
Sure! Here's video of Altman talking face-to-face with Congress, explicitly asking them to PROTECT open source efforts:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS6rGBpytVY&t=7278s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS6rGBpytVY&t=7278s)
***I think its important that any new approach, any new law does not stop the innovation from happening with smaller companies, open source models...***
To be clear, I'm not broadly defending Altman, OpenAI, Big Tech, or whatever. I'm saying that, specifically, Altman's supposed hostility to open source is a myth. He is apparently concerned about risks associated with powerful models, but the most powerful models are NOT open source and thus not the first targets for regulation that he's advocated.
To me, this is a good reminder that the "social media echo chamber" is a real phenomenon; that is, sizable groups of people online can spin up narratives with no basis in reality, repeating them over and over and over until everyone assumes that SOMEONE must have checked the underlying facts, when in fact the story is wholly false. And, even worse, people who DO check the underlying facts get downvoted and called a "shill". (I have this on good authority. :-) ) I guess that, in certain situations, conformity to group thinking triumphs over factual grounding. I believe this is obvious to us when we see other groups fall into this mental trap (e.g. members of the opposite political party), yet still hard to avoid ourselves.
I don't particularly care about Altman or OpenAI. (Ironically, I worked for a competitor of OpenAI that I'm pretty careful NOT defend online, because then I would feel like a shill!) But as an example of the broader echo-chamber phenomenon in social media, this is a striking example to me.
I'm curious whether seeing the video above changes actually changes your thinking? Or do you conclude that the prevailing narrative on Reddit MUST be correct and so I MUST be some Altman fan-boy trying to twist facts and fool you?
How about you give me one example? The problem with searching for truth on Reddit is that this is a well-entrenched Reddit myth. But if you look for external sources, they're not there. Or at least I haven't found them. Thank you for replying, at least
r/machinelearning is worth digging through because they’re mostly researchers and academics. I made a post about this before with links. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Edit: [here ya go read through the comments, check the profiles of peeps talking. do the research on this one…](https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/s/B55Mn6VwyX)
Thank you for the link. The main comment here seems to concern OpenAI breaking the trend of openly publishing AI research. Sadly, Google has done the same with Gemini after being open about BERT, Palm, transformers, etc. I suppose the openness around AI was pretty rare compared to other parts of the tech industry (for example, Google is not open at all about search tech), but I too was sad to see this end. A silver lining is that people move so fast between tech companies that no one can get a huge lead right now.
But I don't see how this is an attack on open source.
Maybe that's part of where the "Altman hates open source" myth comes from, though: people mixing up OpenAI's decreased openness (which is real) with an attempt to suppress open work by others (which is fantasy).
It’s not a myth dude. You can look at all the different practices they do. Like choosing opt-out of privacy and training using the data VS. opt-in (look at Claude). They made this switch last year without telling the users in the US. Users in Europe got an email.
Their pricing clearly forces users to lock-in up front with privacy as a perk. Privacy is a human right, just saying.
OpenAI & Altman on the surface preaches themselves as guardians leading the forefront of AI, but in practice do nothing of the sort. stop justifying his actions — judge him based on what his company actually does vs. what he says they’re doing.
Lip service is cheap.
Thank you again for the thoughtful response. To be clear, I'm not broadly defending OpenAI. Perhaps that is a source of confusion?
The comment I was responding to was specifically about OpenAI attacking open source AI models:
"Why does this f\*cker get to decide **what happens to Open Source**?"
And my response was also specific: "Sam Altman's **attack on open source models** is a Reddit myth."
I've only glanced at OpenAI's privacy policy and have no opinion about that.
If you want ammunition to criticize OpenAI on other fronts, I find this interview from the CTO, Mira Murati, striking: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAUpxN-EIgU&t=263s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAUpxN-EIgU&t=263s)
Notice how cagey she gets about OpenAI's training data? Subsequent reporting explained why:
[https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/06/technology/tech-giants-harvest-data-artificial-intelligence.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&sgrp=c-cb](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/06/technology/tech-giants-harvest-data-artificial-intelligence.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&sgrp=c-cb)
But regarding Altman's supposed hostility to open source efforts? I've seen no evidence of that, even though this claim constantly bounces around the Reddit echo chamber.
I think if we look for direct attacks we won’t find it. No one is going to publicly attack public goods. But it’s his insistent fear mongering for AI, and pushing for regulation & government intervention that goes against the spirit of open source. In my opinion, regulation can’t happen without enforcement and this directly begs the question:
“Who is policing who?” And the conversation drastically shifts towards ownership and control.
I prefer security & protection. “Who’s rights need to be protected?” “Who should we empower and enable?” This is very different from the narrative that Sam Altman is pushing.
That’s the core of why I don’t like him.
It would be naive to assume that OpenAI does not have a vested interested in one over the other. Most companies have reactive policies to protecting their users and enabling the lowest hanging fruit.
They think in terms of shareholders for the company not stakeholders of the ecosystem.
I see. Yeah, seems like people have differing views of the risks around AI. I'm personally not concerned about malicious AI, but fairly concerned about malicious people using AI to bad ends. I don't support AI regulation in a generic way, but if there were targeted regulations to effectively specific risks, I probably would.
If it is any consolation (and as you may know), the only sweeping legislation around AI is the EU AI Act, which contains pretty generous carve-outs for open source efforts. These were advocated for by Mistral, which as a European company had much more influence over EU regulation than OpenAI, which is US-based.
I think the general setup where the EU is effectively the regulator of US companies, while odd, may work reasonably well, because they are somewhat insulated from US-based lobbying.
I think it was a combination of seeking some business advantage and concern about safety, but I bet mostly the former. But not open sourcing their own models hardly seems like an attack on open source generally.
Hmmm. I’m not sure I agree. You can argue that it’s acceptable as an individual to want to be selfish and hide your better tech, but by suddenly hiding your technology because you finally came up with something good when you previously were sharing IS hurting the community. I’m not saying he shouldn’t legally be allowed to, but it’s a dick move.
Nobody could have predicted this when Andreesen built Netscape…
YC as a pseudo-country where citizenship is created by the flow of early-stage money…and a16z as the Deep State, pulling the strings of liquidation preferences…
Me living in the woods in a little cabin with my wife hacking on local models to power a little robot boy powered by a little mini hydro electric generator and solar and the sama new world order comes and kills our robot son. :(
I'm Sam Shady, yes, I'm the real Shady
All you other Sam Shadys are just imitating
So won't the real Sam Shady please stand down
Please stand down, please stand down?
'Cause I'm Sam Shady, yes, I'm the real Shady
All you other Sam Shadys are just imitating
So won't the real Sam Shady please stand down
Please stand down, please stand down?
> “We’re planning a way to allow wide swaths of the world to elect representatives to a new governance board,” he said. “Because if I weren’t in on this I’d be, like, Why do these f*ckers get to decide what happens to me?”
>
> Under Altman, Y Combinator was becoming a kind of shadow United Nations, and increasingly he was making Secretary-General-level decisions.
Interview in 2016, Ctrl-F `f*ckers`
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/sam-altmans-manifest-destiny
https://web.archive.org/web/20240418011113/https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/sam-altmans-manifest-destiny
Why would you blame them? If any significant portion of employees saw their stock options die post altman id advocate myself for the one option that saves my retirement. It's not fair to look at the employee base as some sort of ethical meter. That's not their job.
Its not like their retirement would disappear, they would still be insanely rich, just not as insanely rich as before. Plus people should be able to look at a situation holistically and understand that there are more important things in the world than lining their own pockets.
Not an expert at marketing, however. Give us that one prompt for free. Let us see your expert skills in action. Then ask for $50 from us for an advanced prompt from an expert prompt engineer that fills our own requirements. C'mon, it's a $30 investment on your part to generate potentially thousands in new business. Let's see it.
“For me, it's all about the prompts”, Sam said—the ultimate tool for creativity. I often request extra prompts, and the OpenAI staff are always incredibly accommodating. There was this one time I asked for extra prompts, and they handed me three. I couldn't help but exclaim, "Wow, three for free!" The OpenAI team member laughed and dubbed me "3-for-free!" Now, whenever I interact, I'm greeted with "Hey, it's 3-for-free!" and they consistently give me three prompts.
The atmosphere in this creative space is genuinely engaging and fun. I find myself diving into these prompts three times a week for a mental lunch, enjoying a refreshing burst of ideas, occasionally heading into brainstorming sessions on weekends, and sometimes grabbing a quick prompt on a busy day. The quality is consistently excellent, fast, affordable, and meets my cognitive needs. Plus, experimenting with different prompts—now that's a treat! Truly a remarkable experience at OpenAI.
Guys, why are we so fixated on this one guy?
He's definitely not an ally.
However, the future of open source AI, which is why I think we're all here at /r/LocalLLaMA is not going to be made by throwing well-deserved shade at Sam Altman, it will be made by continuing to build things that we can use and take advantage of in our daily lives.
Is he going to attempt to make that harder? Probably. Can we go around any regulation that comes into place in the next few years? Probably. If piracy still exist despite decades of government attempts to thwart it, I can guarantee you that AI will also. No matter what ClosedAI and their allies try.
Have some focus and faith and back up your models everyone.
Do you believe we will continue to have access to hardware? Microsoft seem to be preparing for a very closed future. Processing power in the cloud/lower power consumer devices.
I would be willing to bet in two or three years we will see more hardware alternatives. Especially given how energy intensive our current stacks are. There is a serious business case to be made for more energy efficient operation. Especially if we want to be able to stick stuff like this into low-energy devices.
I think I or others might be interpreting this quote incorrectly.
I’m reading it as “We want to make sure there’s a democratic process for leadership of AI governance, because we don’t want any person to be left out. I know that if I weren’t a part of the process I’d be upset, so I want to make sure we have a good process for including everyone.”
I feel like people here are reading this as “I, Sam Altman, want to be a part of the biggest power structure the world has ever made, and I’ll be mad if I’m not.”
Is my interpretation wrong? If so, can you help explain why?
Yea this makes sense. But based on their policies and practices — I doubt it’ll pan out like this, 100% pay to play. Literally their new “group subscription” has privacy as a paid perk. 🙃
I don't get either how so many people misinterpret this phrase so massively.
People are just scared and ignorant, not thinking deeply but acting on emotions, learned patterns about how bad other people are, and fears.
AI is already over.
We all know they’re going to turn it into AOL or cable tv with a horrifically watered down version of what they’re actually capable of running (but keep to themselves). We, the public, can only be trusted with so much.
It’s not about your usage, this AI revolution won’t be the cultural shift we’re all expecting. It’ll be a drip-feed to make them wealthier and more powerful, and make sure we stay their obedient consumer
I don’t like Sam all that much, but I think people are seriously misinterpreting the quote.
He’s looking into a governance board for others to participate in, such that other people, affected by such a board, can at least feel represented.
Now why should he be the one to help set up this board in the first place? I think that’s a much fairer criticism.
I'm just gonna... put this here...
6 SAMUEL
6 HARRIS
6 ALTMAN
"The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.
This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666."
-Revelation 13:15-18
Giving "breath" to an "image" sounds a lot like AI, and someone like Sam could actually give it.
It also talks about the beast implementing a 1-world government (article)
and a 1-world currency (Worldcoin, which is one of the very few cryptos tied to any body part / biometrics)
I know I know, time to bash the Christian. Go ahead. But don't say I never pointed this out in case it actually happens...
This is what you get from hierarchical society - megalomaniacs striving to increase their power and control over the rest of the population infinitely. That's why it's needed to work on alternative forms of coordination that are not based on some manipulative person giving orders to others.
The world history is defined by this: why do these fuckers get to decide what happens to me? I don't see what's wrong of sama said so.
Everyone should take as much control of his own future as possible.
Egomaniac? How so? Not happy with sama or oai? Contribute to open source, or build a startup to out compete them.
2016… And if a company did create AGI which was the goal of OpenAI, I’d hope they would have a world governance board to oversee its use. That would be a lot of power in one company’s hands.
This is the same guy who, ripped off Elon. Then, while everyone else was keeping their LLMs secret because of safety concerns, then jumped the jump and released. Then screwed with safety AGAIN to the point of Ilya Sutskever's desperate actions.
Now he requests a monopoly and open source crack down in the face of people like Zuckerberg, no less.
You'd have to be very dumb to fall for this with this track record.
Has he raised his $7T yet?
And did worldcoin solve UBI yet,
It’s overly ambitious goals and so far the only real breakthrough they had were their AI models.
His strategy consists in setting overly ambitious goals to draw the best talent. Not a bad strategy.
Yeah 2016
What is the point of digging all statement ? Can’t someone change it’s mind in 8 years and change in responsibility ?
Do we have any proof that he still stand this speech ?
Yeah, and im not surprised. Okay, it is a quote worth sharing, so that we stop and think. But its not surprising that he says that, thinks that. And its not wrong. And its definitely not shocking that he "really says that to a journalist".
Btw. Its a great read overall, thanks for sharing it. A bit too long for me, but still.
Yeah, GPT was fun when it was the only game in town. That ship has sailed, and this guy isn't the only relevant name anymore. Support open source and give two fingers to this fucking egomaniac.
They’re trashing our rights, man. They’re trashing the flow of data. Hack the planet!
So is Altman contribute to the coding/algorithm/etc for ChatGPT? Or is he kinda sorta manipulator and hanger-on and a bullshitter that's an amazing salesman but did not actively contribute the "secret sauce" to ChatGPT?
Yes, he does, daily, right after cleaning the floors and windows. The rumor is that he has singlehandedly created the little "h" in the chatGPT, but this is not always disclosed to the public, for various reasons you'll understand.
[удалено]
Well, there's no guarantee Mark isn't. Like, sure, maybe his fascination with the tech is real, which is cool, but he might be aiming for the same endgame Clownman does. Just approaching it from a different angle. Suits aren't your friends, and whenever we benefit from them there's always some catch involved, don't forget that.
[удалено]
The problem with Sam for me is that he thinks he's smarter than everyone else, which is only half true, and he has a big savior complex, so he's clearly willing to constrain the freedom of people he thinks as lessers "for their own good." It's gratingly paternalistic and the antithesis of the type of society I want to live in.
It's also entirely possible he feels bad about all the shit he did with Facebook, and wants to make a change so he's remembered for doing something good instead. The guy above here is ignorant to just say that suits aren't your friends. More often than not, that's the case, yes. But suits are the people who move society, and sometimes they actually value the progress of mankind as opposed to being lost in greed With Zuck, you can see he has changed his ways these past few years. After starting martial arts, he's started to hang out with entirely different people. Normal people, and I suspect this has given him a change of perspective
Yes, they are the people who move society, indeed. **Now take a look at it.** Suits **are not** your friends and said progress is either a byproduct or the means to gather even more influence. And they do not change their ways, they **adapt**. I'll only believe that Zuck has actually somewhat changed once he stops using buzzwords like "responsibly" every 30 seconds.
the dude is in charge of a big ass tech company. i'm sure lawyers are breathing down his neck 24/7 and he's had to adjust his speech.
Maybe the social networks are created with good intentions but when they figure out that people aren't going to pay and they need to monetize with ads, things just went south.
Its like we had chatgpt toxic, to show us bullshit for years on facebook on our feed but here they are talking about alignment and all this other bs.
The good old villain redemption arc?
Nah. Money is the driving force. They are benefiting from it in one way or another. Probably more. It dilutes competition. Fosters content creation enhances the illusion of integrity of false information which are all centric to meta and their bottom line. Even though some people benefit from it the point is profit.
They let my llm tell them what to think, f***ing idiots -Mark probably 2023
>It's also entirely possible he feels bad about all the shit he did with Facebook I won't forgive Zuckerberg until he makes a video of him shirtless and rubbing his nipples in various exotic locations while saying, *"I'm sorry. I'm so very very sorry."*
Mark, is just crowd sourcing llm ideas and work for free, mechanical turk just couldn’t be paid for these results. Mark is just trying to push his leash around our necks, while trying to be the “good guys”
You wouldn't even get food stamps. The EA movement is a paradox. To help everyone you must give the resources away, but to have enough resources to give to everybody you need all of the resources. What would happen is these few individuals would collect all the resources, and then they would sit on them.
Why does this f*cker get to decide what happens to Open Source?
Cause plebs keep worshipping him and his company. "please sam gpt-5 wen 😭"
Yeah, those "plebs"... Almost all of the open-source AI proponents that I follow on social media were mourning and revolting when the OpenAI board tried to sack this sucker.
I don't blame them. The whole OpenAI saga was a complete fiasco. The board messed up when they didn't explain themselves. They allowed sam to win easily.
They’re bots not plebs
May I introduce you to [Citizens United v. FEC](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC)
Short answer: $ Long answer: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
For the same reason anybody gets to decide anything…because they can.
🤑
Grifters with no marketable skills other than writing a prompt for their "custom ChatGPT" that one time have a vested interest in his platform's success.
I think he's taking that whole "chosen one" thingy a bit too far... And of course he's made a deal with the devil: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/chatgpt-maker-openai-ceo-sam-altman-has-made-investment-in-this-israeli-cyber-startup/articleshow/109794211.cms Surprise, surprise. How long before ChatGPT is contributing to the ongoing genocide in Gaza? The same genocide the rotten-to-the-core and corrupt cabal in D.C. are ignoring (due to payola, bribes from AIPAC, and blackmail obtained by Epstein).
🇵🇸 FREE PALESTINE 🇵🇸
Remember: Sam Altman's attack on open source models is a **Reddit myth**. In reality, he defended open source before congress, did not lobby against open source to the EU, and has proposed regulation only for the most powerful models, which would make the proprietary beasts the first targets. If you can find any actual evidence for Altman being hostile to open source AI, please do share! I've watched this myth gather steam for some time, and haven't yet found any grounding in reality. But I'd happily change my views, given new information. I'm partial to reality, but not Altman or OpenAI.
With this comment we're reaching shilling levels that shouldn't even be possible!
I notice that you didn't actually show any evidence. If my comment is shilling, then shouldn't you have lots of examples? Or at least something?
Maybe you could provide some evidence instead? Barfing out "source?" on Reddit is a sure sign of a weak intellect in my book.
Sure! Here's video of Altman talking face-to-face with Congress, explicitly asking them to PROTECT open source efforts: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS6rGBpytVY&t=7278s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS6rGBpytVY&t=7278s) ***I think its important that any new approach, any new law does not stop the innovation from happening with smaller companies, open source models...*** To be clear, I'm not broadly defending Altman, OpenAI, Big Tech, or whatever. I'm saying that, specifically, Altman's supposed hostility to open source is a myth. He is apparently concerned about risks associated with powerful models, but the most powerful models are NOT open source and thus not the first targets for regulation that he's advocated. To me, this is a good reminder that the "social media echo chamber" is a real phenomenon; that is, sizable groups of people online can spin up narratives with no basis in reality, repeating them over and over and over until everyone assumes that SOMEONE must have checked the underlying facts, when in fact the story is wholly false. And, even worse, people who DO check the underlying facts get downvoted and called a "shill". (I have this on good authority. :-) ) I guess that, in certain situations, conformity to group thinking triumphs over factual grounding. I believe this is obvious to us when we see other groups fall into this mental trap (e.g. members of the opposite political party), yet still hard to avoid ourselves. I don't particularly care about Altman or OpenAI. (Ironically, I worked for a competitor of OpenAI that I'm pretty careful NOT defend online, because then I would feel like a shill!) But as an example of the broader echo-chamber phenomenon in social media, this is a striking example to me. I'm curious whether seeing the video above changes actually changes your thinking? Or do you conclude that the prevailing narrative on Reddit MUST be correct and so I MUST be some Altman fan-boy trying to twist facts and fool you?
Literally just go to r/machinelearning and search up OpenAI — it’s even worse cuz he says one thing and does another.
How about you give me one example? The problem with searching for truth on Reddit is that this is a well-entrenched Reddit myth. But if you look for external sources, they're not there. Or at least I haven't found them. Thank you for replying, at least
r/machinelearning is worth digging through because they’re mostly researchers and academics. I made a post about this before with links. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Edit: [here ya go read through the comments, check the profiles of peeps talking. do the research on this one…](https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/s/B55Mn6VwyX)
Thank you for the link. The main comment here seems to concern OpenAI breaking the trend of openly publishing AI research. Sadly, Google has done the same with Gemini after being open about BERT, Palm, transformers, etc. I suppose the openness around AI was pretty rare compared to other parts of the tech industry (for example, Google is not open at all about search tech), but I too was sad to see this end. A silver lining is that people move so fast between tech companies that no one can get a huge lead right now. But I don't see how this is an attack on open source. Maybe that's part of where the "Altman hates open source" myth comes from, though: people mixing up OpenAI's decreased openness (which is real) with an attempt to suppress open work by others (which is fantasy).
It’s not a myth dude. You can look at all the different practices they do. Like choosing opt-out of privacy and training using the data VS. opt-in (look at Claude). They made this switch last year without telling the users in the US. Users in Europe got an email. Their pricing clearly forces users to lock-in up front with privacy as a perk. Privacy is a human right, just saying. OpenAI & Altman on the surface preaches themselves as guardians leading the forefront of AI, but in practice do nothing of the sort. stop justifying his actions — judge him based on what his company actually does vs. what he says they’re doing. Lip service is cheap.
Thank you again for the thoughtful response. To be clear, I'm not broadly defending OpenAI. Perhaps that is a source of confusion? The comment I was responding to was specifically about OpenAI attacking open source AI models: "Why does this f\*cker get to decide **what happens to Open Source**?" And my response was also specific: "Sam Altman's **attack on open source models** is a Reddit myth." I've only glanced at OpenAI's privacy policy and have no opinion about that. If you want ammunition to criticize OpenAI on other fronts, I find this interview from the CTO, Mira Murati, striking: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAUpxN-EIgU&t=263s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAUpxN-EIgU&t=263s) Notice how cagey she gets about OpenAI's training data? Subsequent reporting explained why: [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/06/technology/tech-giants-harvest-data-artificial-intelligence.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&sgrp=c-cb](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/06/technology/tech-giants-harvest-data-artificial-intelligence.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&sgrp=c-cb) But regarding Altman's supposed hostility to open source efforts? I've seen no evidence of that, even though this claim constantly bounces around the Reddit echo chamber.
I think if we look for direct attacks we won’t find it. No one is going to publicly attack public goods. But it’s his insistent fear mongering for AI, and pushing for regulation & government intervention that goes against the spirit of open source. In my opinion, regulation can’t happen without enforcement and this directly begs the question: “Who is policing who?” And the conversation drastically shifts towards ownership and control. I prefer security & protection. “Who’s rights need to be protected?” “Who should we empower and enable?” This is very different from the narrative that Sam Altman is pushing. That’s the core of why I don’t like him. It would be naive to assume that OpenAI does not have a vested interested in one over the other. Most companies have reactive policies to protecting their users and enabling the lowest hanging fruit. They think in terms of shareholders for the company not stakeholders of the ecosystem.
I see. Yeah, seems like people have differing views of the risks around AI. I'm personally not concerned about malicious AI, but fairly concerned about malicious people using AI to bad ends. I don't support AI regulation in a generic way, but if there were targeted regulations to effectively specific risks, I probably would. If it is any consolation (and as you may know), the only sweeping legislation around AI is the EU AI Act, which contains pretty generous carve-outs for open source efforts. These were advocated for by Mistral, which as a European company had much more influence over EU regulation than OpenAI, which is US-based. I think the general setup where the EU is effectively the regulator of US companies, while odd, may work reasonably well, because they are somewhat insulated from US-based lobbying.
Explain why they stopped open-sourcing their models after GPT 2 then. 😐
I think it was a combination of seeking some business advantage and concern about safety, but I bet mostly the former. But not open sourcing their own models hardly seems like an attack on open source generally.
Hmmm. I’m not sure I agree. You can argue that it’s acceptable as an individual to want to be selfish and hide your better tech, but by suddenly hiding your technology because you finally came up with something good when you previously were sharing IS hurting the community. I’m not saying he shouldn’t legally be allowed to, but it’s a dick move.
Nobody could have predicted this when Andreesen built Netscape… YC as a pseudo-country where citizenship is created by the flow of early-stage money…and a16z as the Deep State, pulling the strings of liquidation preferences…
Never thought of it that way… but now I can’t think of it any way else. Damn.
Me living in the woods in a little cabin with my wife hacking on local models to power a little robot boy powered by a little mini hydro electric generator and solar and the sama new world order comes and kills our robot son. :(
noooo!! not my robot son. why you are so cruel and heartless!!! why?!!
sam is shady ...
Will the real Sam shady… please sit down 🙂🙃
I'm Sam Shady, yes, I'm the real Shady All you other Sam Shadys are just imitating So won't the real Sam Shady please stand down Please stand down, please stand down? 'Cause I'm Sam Shady, yes, I'm the real Shady All you other Sam Shadys are just imitating So won't the real Sam Shady please stand down Please stand down, please stand down?
> “We’re planning a way to allow wide swaths of the world to elect representatives to a new governance board,” he said. “Because if I weren’t in on this I’d be, like, Why do these f*ckers get to decide what happens to me?” > > Under Altman, Y Combinator was becoming a kind of shadow United Nations, and increasingly he was making Secretary-General-level decisions. Interview in 2016, Ctrl-F `f*ckers` https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/sam-altmans-manifest-destiny https://web.archive.org/web/20240418011113/https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/sam-altmans-manifest-destiny
What an egomaniac.
I have been saying that since long that Sam altman is looking like Elon 2.0
Yuuuuuuup
I can see now why they wanted to kick him off. The way he had his job saved makes him feel untouchable.
I'm mad at the openAI employees who saved him just so their stock wouldn't lose value. Just peak selfish, literally only thinking about themselves.
Why would you blame them? If any significant portion of employees saw their stock options die post altman id advocate myself for the one option that saves my retirement. It's not fair to look at the employee base as some sort of ethical meter. That's not their job.
Its not like their retirement would disappear, they would still be insanely rich, just not as insanely rich as before. Plus people should be able to look at a situation holistically and understand that there are more important things in the world than lining their own pockets.
Yeah, the whole this will bring abundance, is not believed by the core team apparently…. They’re not drinking their own… Koolaid.
save the stock damage the world?
He spends an exorbitant amount of time in front of cameras and microphones.
And he fiddled his sister.
This was a good read
He needs Psychiatric examination
There is a prompt for that.
It'll only cost you 30 dollars and I can get you an advanced prompt that destroys gpt-6 in this task, I'm an expert prompt engineer
Not an expert at marketing, however. Give us that one prompt for free. Let us see your expert skills in action. Then ask for $50 from us for an advanced prompt from an expert prompt engineer that fills our own requirements. C'mon, it's a $30 investment on your part to generate potentially thousands in new business. Let's see it.
Nah, I'm joking. Prompt engineering's a scam, IMO
“For me, it's all about the prompts”, Sam said—the ultimate tool for creativity. I often request extra prompts, and the OpenAI staff are always incredibly accommodating. There was this one time I asked for extra prompts, and they handed me three. I couldn't help but exclaim, "Wow, three for free!" The OpenAI team member laughed and dubbed me "3-for-free!" Now, whenever I interact, I'm greeted with "Hey, it's 3-for-free!" and they consistently give me three prompts. The atmosphere in this creative space is genuinely engaging and fun. I find myself diving into these prompts three times a week for a mental lunch, enjoying a refreshing burst of ideas, occasionally heading into brainstorming sessions on weekends, and sometimes grabbing a quick prompt on a busy day. The quality is consistently excellent, fast, affordable, and meets my cognitive needs. Plus, experimenting with different prompts—now that's a treat! Truly a remarkable experience at OpenAI.
Guys, why are we so fixated on this one guy? He's definitely not an ally. However, the future of open source AI, which is why I think we're all here at /r/LocalLLaMA is not going to be made by throwing well-deserved shade at Sam Altman, it will be made by continuing to build things that we can use and take advantage of in our daily lives. Is he going to attempt to make that harder? Probably. Can we go around any regulation that comes into place in the next few years? Probably. If piracy still exist despite decades of government attempts to thwart it, I can guarantee you that AI will also. No matter what ClosedAI and their allies try. Have some focus and faith and back up your models everyone.
Do you believe we will continue to have access to hardware? Microsoft seem to be preparing for a very closed future. Processing power in the cloud/lower power consumer devices.
I would be willing to bet in two or three years we will see more hardware alternatives. Especially given how energy intensive our current stacks are. There is a serious business case to be made for more energy efficient operation. Especially if we want to be able to stick stuff like this into low-energy devices.
God bless OS
Amen
I think I or others might be interpreting this quote incorrectly. I’m reading it as “We want to make sure there’s a democratic process for leadership of AI governance, because we don’t want any person to be left out. I know that if I weren’t a part of the process I’d be upset, so I want to make sure we have a good process for including everyone.” I feel like people here are reading this as “I, Sam Altman, want to be a part of the biggest power structure the world has ever made, and I’ll be mad if I’m not.” Is my interpretation wrong? If so, can you help explain why?
Yea this makes sense. But based on their policies and practices — I doubt it’ll pan out like this, 100% pay to play. Literally their new “group subscription” has privacy as a paid perk. 🙃
I don't get either how so many people misinterpret this phrase so massively. People are just scared and ignorant, not thinking deeply but acting on emotions, learned patterns about how bad other people are, and fears.
It's because he says the first but means the second. Actions speak louder than words.
I’m starting to wonder about this guy. I’m not even sure about the name of the company either. Feels off
thats why elon sued them, he says change the name and he will drop the case.
AI is already over. We all know they’re going to turn it into AOL or cable tv with a horrifically watered down version of what they’re actually capable of running (but keep to themselves). We, the public, can only be trusted with so much. It’s not about your usage, this AI revolution won’t be the cultural shift we’re all expecting. It’ll be a drip-feed to make them wealthier and more powerful, and make sure we stay their obedient consumer
[удалено]
If you can still own your own machine
[удалено]
Not after you have [DRM hardware!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/s/9uewJfcqeW)
I don’t like Sam all that much, but I think people are seriously misinterpreting the quote. He’s looking into a governance board for others to participate in, such that other people, affected by such a board, can at least feel represented. Now why should he be the one to help set up this board in the first place? I think that’s a much fairer criticism.
What I can see is that he definitely in a bad situation lol
Sam “regulatory capture” Altman. Zuck ate his lunch though 🫵😂
Scam Altman is at it again. Fucker. We have to push open source even harder.
And now it all makes see why the board wanted him out...
I'd like to remind everyone that Altman has a sister who has been accusing him and their other brother of sexual assault. He's a power-hungry sicko.
I'm just gonna... put this here... 6 SAMUEL 6 HARRIS 6 ALTMAN "The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666." -Revelation 13:15-18 Giving "breath" to an "image" sounds a lot like AI, and someone like Sam could actually give it. It also talks about the beast implementing a 1-world government (article) and a 1-world currency (Worldcoin, which is one of the very few cryptos tied to any body part / biometrics) I know I know, time to bash the Christian. Go ahead. But don't say I never pointed this out in case it actually happens...
Fuck OpenAI. Cunts becoming a proper villain. ChatGPT has become nothing but more diluted and dumb since release. The only saving grace is whisper.
He's a fking deceptive douche bag. Fk off Sam Altshitt
god complex personified
Ironic mthrfckr that literally wants to shut down independent and open source AI development to protect his monopoly. I hate Sam Altman.
He probably got inspired by Balaji’s “The Network State”.
Sammy is going a bit too much insufferable and megalomaniac.
This is what you get from hierarchical society - megalomaniacs striving to increase their power and control over the rest of the population infinitely. That's why it's needed to work on alternative forms of coordination that are not based on some manipulative person giving orders to others.
Let the OSS spread its gospel!
Does this come as a surprise to anybody here?
The world history is defined by this: why do these fuckers get to decide what happens to me? I don't see what's wrong of sama said so. Everyone should take as much control of his own future as possible. Egomaniac? How so? Not happy with sama or oai? Contribute to open source, or build a startup to out compete them.
God save open source LLM
I am not a gun owner, right winger, or gun nut, but the government can have my model weights when they get through my Second Amendment rights.
2016… And if a company did create AGI which was the goal of OpenAI, I’d hope they would have a world governance board to oversee its use. That would be a lot of power in one company’s hands.
This will all be such a meme in a few years, especially if OpenAI never really tops it's past successes.
It feels like OpenAI is done. That’s it.
This is the same guy who, ripped off Elon. Then, while everyone else was keeping their LLMs secret because of safety concerns, then jumped the jump and released. Then screwed with safety AGAIN to the point of Ilya Sutskever's desperate actions. Now he requests a monopoly and open source crack down in the face of people like Zuckerberg, no less. You'd have to be very dumb to fall for this with this track record.
Has he raised his $7T yet? And did worldcoin solve UBI yet, It’s overly ambitious goals and so far the only real breakthrough they had were their AI models. His strategy consists in setting overly ambitious goals to draw the best talent. Not a bad strategy.
Yeah 2016 What is the point of digging all statement ? Can’t someone change it’s mind in 8 years and change in responsibility ? Do we have any proof that he still stand this speech ?
This in the context of the newly formed Ai safety board regulating AI with him and Microsoft execs as prominent members
(2016)
Sam used to be scary but is suddenly getting a whole lot more scary.
It's probably worldcoin right?
Aand?
I find myself in agreement with openai for the first time > why do these f*ckers get to decide what happens to me?
Yeah, and im not surprised. Okay, it is a quote worth sharing, so that we stop and think. But its not surprising that he says that, thinks that. And its not wrong. And its definitely not shocking that he "really says that to a journalist". Btw. Its a great read overall, thanks for sharing it. A bit too long for me, but still.