I don't think it makes sense to look at some previous PR statements of Altman et al re this when there a tens of billions floating around and egos get inflated to moon sizes. Farts in the wind have more weight, but this goes for all corporate PR.

Thieves yelling 'stop those thieves' scenario to me, they just were first and would not like losing that position. But its all about money and consequently power, business as usual.

There seems to a rare moderation error by dang with respect to this thread.

The comments were moved here by dang from an flagged article with an editorialized /clickbait title. That flagged post has 1300 points at the time of writing.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42865527

1.

It should be incumbent on the moderator to at least consider that the motivation for the points and comments may have been because many thought the "hypocrisy" of OpenAI's position was a more important issue than OpenAI's actual claim of DeepSeek violating its ToS. Moving the comments to an article that buries the potential hypocrisy issue that may have driven the original points and comments is not ideal.

2.

This article is from FT, which has a content license deal with OpenAI. To move the comments to an article from a company that has a conflict of interest due to its commercial relations with the YC company in question is problematic here especially since dang often states they try to more hands-off on moderation when the article is about a YC company.

3.

There is a link by dang to this thread from the original thread, but there should also be a link by dang to the original thread from here as well. Why is this not the case?

4.

Ideally, dang should have asked for a more substantial submission that prioritized the hypocrisy point to better match the spirit of the original post instead of moving the comments to this article.

One of the few times I’ve disagreed with dang’s moderation, truly obnoxious to try and find a conversation you checked on previously.

Yes, but we were duped at the time, so it’s right and good that we maintain light on and anger at the ongoing manipulation, in the hope of next time recognizing it as it happens, not after they’ve used us, screwed us, and walked away with a vast fortune.

But it makes sense to expose their blatantly lies whenever possible to diminish the credibility they are trying to build while accusing others of the same they did

Oh yes I agree with all of you that lies should be exposed, also who lies like that once will lie again, 0 doubt there.

Just don't set the expectations bar too high to start with is all I am saying. Folks that get so high up money and power wise aren't nice people, period. Even if nice normal guy without any sociopathic traits would suddenly shoot so high, the environment and pressures would deform them pretty quickly.

Also, I would consider only some leaked private conversations with close people as representative truth, not some PR statements carefully crafted by team of experts.

Happy to be proven wrong, still waiting for an example #1 to give me some hope.

Is there anything still "open" about OpenAI these days?

The bow doors?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Herald_of_Free_Enterprise

You don't understand, "open" stands for "open your wallet."

Or another question, do they still publish any research that’s relevant for the field nowadays?

No. They publish PDFs that hype up their models, but they do not publish anything even resembling a high-level overview of model architecture

Given that you can download and use the weights, the model architecture has to be includded as part of that. And I did read a paper from them recently describing their MoE architecture and how it differs from the original GShard.

Excuse me? What weights can you download from OpenAI? gpt2 does not count

Sorry I meant that DeepSeek release their models. Wrong context.

I hear Sam is pretty open in his relationship.

Lmfao