Comment by titanomachy
7 days ago
> open models are inherently decelerationist
I’m struggling to understand this perspective. Is he using the words accelerationist/decelerationist in a sense other than the obvious one?
EDIT: I searched his twitter history and discovered that his argument is basically “if you drive down costs, then OpenAI will have less money to invest in development, slowing down the overall rate of AI progress.” IMO this take betrays an overwhelmingly stupid degree of exceptionalism, but I guess that’s what I’d expect from someone working at OpenAI.
Nah, the point is that if models are commoditized and there's no hope of making significant profits, no one is going to be willing to make the massive investments necessary to continue pushing the scale frontier. How large a training run do you expect investors to fund out of the goodness of their hearts?
> no one is going to be willing to make the massive investments necessary to continue pushing the scale frontier.
that sounds great to me. anything that slows down the pace and gives us a chance to prepare for, at best, massive job displacement, and at worst, robots turning us all into paperclips.
The real problem is that I could probably solve even biggerer issues if the investment went to me instead of OpenAI, so OpenAI has a moral imperative to shut down and send me all their money right now.
what good does it do to invest in a solved problem?
if open models are good enough then it doesn't matter, if they aren't then there's probably a return available in investing there.
Doesn't this merely mean that states will do the job of investment ?
What a delusional f-wit lol he wants protection of profits for reinvestment?
Every company wants that!