Thank fuck they weren't called "HomelandAI" or "LibertyAI" or somesuch!

I smell a business opportunity. "HomelandAI" sounds rather nationalist.

I see your subliminal "The Boys" reference :)

well atleast now they are Open about their intentions

:)

Open access for a fee? Yes.

The original point of openAI was to make sure google and facebook don't completely dominate AI and keep their work hidden due to the innovator's dilemma they face. Seems like they've absolutely accomplished that. Yes, they've stretched the meaning of "open" but I don't think they've ever tried to claim they had some sort of open source aspirations.

OpenAI = Microsoft, which you have conveniently left out in your FAANG enumeration

Because Microsoft was in no way a leader in AI research when openAI was founded. But the important part here isn't keeping AI work from being dominated by big tech. It's to keep it from being hidden from the public by big tech.

Can you elaborate on the last sentence?

Google and Facebook have long had language models that have been reported to be vastly superior to what was publicly available. The one that a Google engineer claimed was sentient was the most well known example. OpenAI was founded in reaction to these models being hidden away.

OpenAI was founded in 2015, well before those models were created.

Which letter is Microsoft again? (I always forget.)

They claimed a lot of things. Open source, non-profit. Then they changed their minds on all of them.

As for open access, that's usually defined as free of charge. E.g open access journals.

It's sort of like how Uber dropped the pseudo-green 'ride-sharing' language from its marketing as soon as they had enough investor $ and brand recognition to cut out taxis with predatory pricing.

Open your wallet? Yes.

Perhaps they mean that they operate in the open? They publish research, do open unrestricted beta tests etc.

I'm not sure they will necessarily live up to every definition of open you'll ever come up with, but its hardly the worst name in the tech space.

I'm still waiting for apple to deliver that tree to me. Facebook isn't a book AND the faces are almost always the smallest piece of content on a post (and some people's avatar isn't even their face!). Can't wait for my trip to the Amazon w/ Mr Bezos!

It's supposed to be 'Open' in comparison to Deepmind/Google Brain, not open in comparison to e.g. Linux.

> Open-source algorithm? No.

The publish their algorithms just fine and no one has had issues replicating their work.

Where's the ChatGPT paper?

From the ChatGTP announcement: "ChatGTP is a sibling model to Instruct GPT"

The paper for that is linked from https://openai.com/research/instruction-following

The InstructGPT paper only explains the RLHF part of how ChatGPT works. There's reason to believe that isn't enough to achieve ChatGPT's performance and behaviour (e.g. [1]). There are other components that make ChatGPT more powerful, and OpenAPI is not being open about them.

[1] https://yaofu.notion.site/How-does-GPT-Obtain-its-Ability-Tr...

I don't think that conclusion is clear at all. Indeed your own link has things they thought were unclear struck and and parts of the InstructGPT paper that explains them inserted.

They do have newer models that aren't generally available that are different though.