Comment by appplication
20 hours ago
I appreciate the sentiment but I’m giving OpenAI 0 credit for anything open source, given their founding charter and how readily it was abandoned when it became clear the work could be financially exploited.
20 hours ago
I appreciate the sentiment but I’m giving OpenAI 0 credit for anything open source, given their founding charter and how readily it was abandoned when it became clear the work could be financially exploited.
> when it became clear the work could be financially exploited
That is not the obvious reason for the change. Training models got a lot more expensive than anyone thought it would.
You can of course always cast shade on people's true motivations and intentions, but there is a plain truth here that is simply silly to ignore.
Training "frontier" open LLMs seems to be exactly possible when a) you are Meta, have substantial revenue from other sources and simply are okay with burning your cash reserves to try to make something happen and b) you copy and distill from the existing models.
I agree that openAI should be held with a certain degree of contempt, but refusing to acknowledge anything positive they do is an interesting perspective. Why insist on a one dimensional view? It’s like a fraudster giving to charity, they can be praiseworthy in some respect while being overall contemptible, no?
Why even acknowledge them in any regard? Put trash where it belongs.
By this measure, they shouldn’t even try to do good things in small pockets and probably should just optimize for profits!
Fortunately, many other people can deal with nuance.