this reeks of exit strategy lol, it was clear that chatGPT wasn't a viable product. for some god forsaken reason silicon valley decided to put all their chips in one basket and just as sequoia and jp morgan made it clear that they weren't expecting any returns from openAI anymore, sam altman re-structures the company so he can liquidate a big portion of the company at any time and walk away with billions while showing nothing, the same way startup CEOs tend to fail. upwards.
I hate this perspective, meta was sort of forced to open source their model as it leaked to the public. Thats is why llama 2’s licence is more restrictive, than llama 1.
They should pay back taxes. You shouldn’t be allowed to form a nonprofit get all the tax breaks and then when you become profitable, decide that you’re going to become for profit.
@@kevgoeswoof If your "worst" person consistently does the right things¹… maybe it's time to do some soul searching. 🤔 ________ ¹) Or at least more often than everyone else.
Their business model is exactly the same as Uber / Uber eats , create a useful and cheap service , get people hooked, eliminate the competition so you have everyone using your locked down closed fifdom that you control 100% and when people are too used to that service jack up prices and make your money since you have them locked up in your own fifdom with no real alternatives.
They've been pretty clear about the fact that the wind was blowing in this direction for at least a year, so I don't really think this should surprise anyone.
You state that "OpenAI released a lot of their research" which was not true since gpt-3.5, the technical reports published were in no way revealing anything useful anymore. Nowadays their technical reports are merely marketing. So even the knowledge is in the walled garden now.
Nah, it'll be like with those plastic labels, that are designed to look like recycling label to mislead people into thinking "oh, it's not such an awful thing".
Generative AI is cooked. The whole "we need to be careful that this thing doesn't become too powerful" was a sales pitch and hasn't worked so they might as well change to maximize the short term returns before the whole thing tanks.
Okay, so one of the arguments for scraping all that Art, Books and Videos that are clearly protected by copyright, but were not asked any permission for was "Hey, it's non-profit, so fair use". Now what? We're supposed to just... Forget that thing?
I keep thinking of that Eric Schmidt talk where he told a bunch of Stanford students to use AI to copy other peoples work, steal their business, and let their lawyers fight it out after they've made their money. They don't care, they don't even see it as an ethical dilemma, all they see is that there's profit to be made and the victims will never be able to compete with them in court due to the vast difference in resources available.
OpenAI: Not open Microsoft: Produces giant, hard-to-use software Best Buy: Often not the best place to buy electronics TikTok: Isn't really about time, just losing track of it PayPal: Not your friendly payment buddy Wise: Financial decisions using it aren't always wise
@@williamdrum9899 North Korea is best Korea. Funny fact: Trump is banned from YT but not the Kim. Makes sense right? www.youtube.com/@northkoreanow6042
Theo missed the fact that the only other company with ability/permission to run OpenAI models is Microsoft. e.g. there is only one other powerful rich company with ability to run the models.
@@danhorus Apple is a pretty closed book on that part. For the services that they run right now they don't need that kind of computing power. Getting that kind of hardware is not a question of money right now as Nvidia can just decide to not give you the H100's you need to run a model this big. As for the Apple AI that they're rolling out: We don't really know what that is running on hardware wise on their end. It might be that they have a specific pipeline to run LLMs on their Apple Silicon (which might not be capable of running OpenAIs models) AAAAAAAnd there is also the huuuuuge elephant in the room that Apple probably wouldn't agree to a partnership like that as it would go against their whole way of doing business.
@@danhorus Nvidia + Microsoft, they build two dedicated "BFGPU^10 GPU" to run their AI Models (Prepared for Chat GPT 5). They predicted Chat GPT 4o to take about 6-8 months to train (it's in preview now). Chat GPT5 (in 5-8 months) will be next year, the king. ruclips.net/video/QsWtiop4IJA/видео.html
@@adrianmenzel1532If NVDIA just refuse to ship H100s to specific companies they will get an AntiTrust suit within days. They need to be very careful to avoid being the focus of that sort of scrutiny. Careful means: clears ways to capture and store customer demand data, a defined algorithm for assigning supply to that demand, clear criteria for getting shipments that have no human bias in them, eg we like that company so they get supply. Etc etc.
marking things as "Conspiracy Theory(ists)" downplays the fact that it's actually very easy to Conspire. everyone expected this and that's the problem.
Yeah he explained the 'conspiracy theory' but didn't actually explain any theory. He just showed the events of the company going from an ethics-first non-profit to a for-profit that has seen its ethical members either fired or quit. Kinda feels like when google abandoned their 'don't be evil' mantra.
The power of profit motive and the logic of capitalism just keeps rolling forward and crushing idealism. It's not some hidden conspiracy, it's the way it's explicitly set up to work.
Sam saying he's going to spend more time on technical side is funny. Focusing on the product side, sure, I believe he can meaningfully contribute given his time at YC. But him focusing on the technical side is just larping.
Any organization with Larry Summers on the board needs to be viewed with extreme scrutiny, and by default assumed hostile to the common man. He was one of the chief architects of the dismantling of Russia, after the ended the Soviet union, basically giving it away to oligarchs, without him Russia would have been a far better place today.
Flight records introduced as evidence in the 2021 trial of Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell show that Larry Summers flew on Jeffrey Epstein's private plane on at least four occasions, including once in 1998 when Larry Summers was United States Deputy Secretary of the Treasury and at least three times while Harvard president.
The word "open" should be regulated. A company that claims being open or uses the word for naming any asset must enforce the following. 1) All information must be disclosed and easily available. 2) The asset must be free to use. Both as in freedom and free of charge. Example: ExampleOpen must disclose all their company information. All there products must be free to use without any charge to use it.
Oh good, now that the facade has dropped, every artist and writer has even more grounds to suing the ever loving hell out of them. They flat out lied from the get go, and they knew it. I can't wait to see their interoffice memos hit the court rooms. I'm certain there's some juicy conversations withheld from the public.
AI doesn't need to kill humans for it to have disatrous consequences. If the claims companies like Microsoft make are to be believed, and these kinds of AI could mean that you need 1/10th of the people to do the same amount of work, I could not imagine how detrimental that could be to society. Historically, when jobs are lost to automation it is because we can move humans from fields and factories and into more creative or intellectually stimulating jobs. AI has the potential to automate offices and art instead of manual labor. That is worth being concerned about.
Also, manual labor is not safe at all. It’s the same narrative now with labor, that people used years ago with art and creative work. The robots are coming and that’s sooner rather than later. The missing piece for robots is a brain. The mechanics are already at a level where you can do labor. Robots will come after year or two after AI, only because you need to build them and create factories, etc.
Non-profits have more lenient restrictions on what is considered fair use. I wonder if openai figured out that with current law ai will definitely not lose to copyright infringement and that's basically it.
Ever played "The Ascent"? The AI trajectory to this game is getting aligned everyday by a bit more. Only extremely big corporations will have access to AGI, as it will costs billions to just run it.
Capitalism turns *everything* into products, so it's not surprising that AI becomes one too. And the only goal of a product is to generate as much profit as possible. This is just capitalism 101.
What’s your alternative, Alexandre? Capitalism in its current form most definitely has a plethora of systemic and fundamental problems that require scrutiny but if we aren’t creating ‘products’, what are we all to do? Create ‘things’ for the greater good because if that’s the case, there’s no incentive for most of us to operate within a system like that. I’d rather spend my days sunbathing on a golden beach whilst you do the hard work developing ‘things’ whilst I get automatic entitlement to the fruits of your labour.
@@amxdai4568 it's a fallacy that we need to have economic pressure to work and innovate. The whole OSS is based on that, public university also develop most of the technology without such pressure. And you are a leech, and later y'all say that it is the communist that doesn't like to work. But I would rather everyone take a sunbathing from the results of their own labour than from you spend all your days stealing the sunbathing of everyone else. Keep your CEO in golden beach hyping AI while China develops actual products like EV, microchip, batteries,and let's see how long the US will keep as the world's biggest power. 😘
@@amxdai4568 a tomato should be created to feed, not to be a product. A house should be created to host people, not to me a product. Health should be created to save people and not be a product. At the moment that the only goal of any food is to be sold and not feed people, then you justify burning tons of food for price Control while we have a lot of hunger people. Then it is better to have more empty houses than homeless people. Then it is better to leave US citizens dying from diabetes because they have pay 100 dollars in insulins, while most of the third world countries have those for free.
@@alexandrecolautoneto7374 I’m confused by your response, I’m asking for your alternative to capitalism due to your initial comment suggesting that capitalism is a negative and you call me a communist? 😅 You’re point regarding everyone enjoying the fruits of their own labour is one I wholeheartedly believe in… but that only happens with a form of capitalism so either I have massively misinterpreted your initial comment or you’re contradicting yourself.
@@alexandrecolautoneto7374 Brother, you are hugely misinformed and narrow minded. A tomato IS produced to feed… but humans discovered that 99% of people are more than happy to purchase a tomato as a product for convenience. What’s stopping you growing your own fruit and vegetables? If you actively choose to participate within the very systems you’re criticising then I have no sympathy for you being at the mercy of big food corporations. Now that being said, there are certain systems that we simply cannot avoid participating in if we want to live a specific way but the majority of the consumer market is able to exist because the general public fund it.
2:50 - Actually, by the terms, the actual limit to what you could make was * 20 = 200 million in this case. The OpenAI LP cap was never meant to and never did affect anyone.
Pleasantly surprised to see Infinite Red on here. Big fan of their podcast React Native Radio and their open source RN boilerplate Ignite. Keep it up Jamon and Co!
geez, i wonder what is gonna be the justification now for the fact they used/still use intellectual property of programmers, writers, artists, photographers, musicians, etc, without paying anything in the way of royalties. I mean, that would make the lawsuits a bit of a slam dunk, no? (genuine question, i'm not usa-based and don't know the law there to that extent).
Non profits are still centralized corporations. The board is basically the owner and the owner does what is best for the owner. The mission is always only just words.
If the board is currently in charge, surely they must agree to this? So why would the non-profit board ever vote to remove themselves from power and give a for-profit company all the power at the same time?
Theo, first of all I respect your expertise and especially enjoy your calm demeanor, but I'm genuinely surprised at your lack of business sense regarding OpenAI making this shift because I generally find your opinions to be well-researched. Venture capitalists expected faster returns on AI investments than they're currently getting, so now they're deciding to subsidize less and require these companies to adapt their business models to be more capital efficient and also have the pricing be more reflective of the costs to reduce the burn rate Furthermore I'd like to add that you know far more than I do about the ins and outs of the IT industry. I was insulated from a great deal of it by working in the defense industry (and a tad bit of civilian government contracting) early in my career, which made me have to play about a decade of catch-up on technical skills alone when I went to the civilian private sector, and I know far less about the corporate intrigue side. I would never claim to be better than you in this field, I'm just pointing out that the VCs are getting impatient, and we'll probably see more and more "AI startups" shut their doors. Similar to blockchain companies a few years ago
Masterful maneuvering by Altman yet again (his greatest strength). Who knew you could have your cake ("I'm rich enough - I just love the work") and eat it too ("7% stake for $10B"). If you want some OpenAI stock, I'm sure Altman would be MORE THAN happy to sell some to you at the current valuation on the secondary market!
Dude, I think that's the first time I've sat through an entire video sponsor without skipping, was entertained and at the same time fully absorbed the sponsor's message. Kudos!
From a higher level, a company is also its own emergent entity with its own will. If it lives in a growth-centered system, and no safeguards are put in place to prevent course-changing, then I guess it's only natural to expect that the company's own best interest to keep existing will be prioritized. All in all I think it was an interesting experiment in what safeguards are sufficient for an extremely fast growing, powerful company.
Suggesting that the controls attempted were obviously insufficient? or that fundamental forces in our economy/humanity just make the attempt to control it futile?
@@RyanCrossOfficial I don't know. But I remain optimistic that we can control it, but we have to get better at it. We gotta assume that people turn into 🐍🐍
PLEASE CONTINUE TO COVER OPENAI. Unlike a lot of channels, your explanations aren't partisan or meant to persuade. I'm following the company's course avidly. I also wonder what your experience of Claude is like?
They don't have any special technology that no one else possesses...everyone has access to stable diffusion, transformers and even Sora like video generators...Companies I mean...if inclined enough can compete...Look at Anthropic came from nowhere and produced a better model than ChatGPT
The one good thing about OpenAI going full for profit, is that at least now the mask is off. Any pretence that they were a "non-profit" is ash in the wind. Now they just need to change their name away from the comically inappropriate "Open" AI.
We need to distinguish between "profit" and "investment". If Ai were being built in a free market, that would be one thing, but when you peel it back, it was driven by money from the fed - so it was never going to have a responsibility to customers, only to investors. The difference between "investment" and a "loan" is that a loan has to be profit-focused because it has to be paid back. Investment has to be big-tech/big-government focused, because that's were it must yield returns. Loans drive profitable customer-focus. Investment does not. Any "for the people" organization can only survive on profits and loans. No organization can both get investment and be "for the people". It's just not possible. Investment always leads to a game of investor hot-potato and growth, and never to customer-focused profitability.
I'm actually kinda excited. Let's see what this change brings. I'm tired to be a doomer, I mean, it's here, a lot of people lose their jobs, economy dipping down, what worse could happen? so I'll just sit back and watch everything unfold.
I am impressed by Llama 3.2, being that small and working that well. Please continue building small, capable models as fast as possible, so we can ditch OpenAI. This is really the natural mess we have to deal with as humans.
Again alignment is not a programming problem, it’s a sociological one. We already have an alignment problem between institutions like a government and corporations with the people they serve. The problem is analogous. Solving one will give you solutions you can apply to the other. Sigh.
If your incentives are aligned with making profit, that is what you're going to do. Make sure your company's incentives stay aligned with delivering an amazing product and the profit will almost always happen along with it.
Sam Altman betrayed the open-source community. He built his company on the contribution of good and honest people, then turned around and sold them out at the earliest opportunity.
Remember, all these big companies signing deals happens with exchange of gargantuan amounts of personal, identifiable data. Remember how many companies one after the other rapidly introduced the 30day opt-out for arbitration clause? And then updating their privacy policy? And then adding AI to all of their products? The dots are not that hard to connect. In fact, that's the trail of money.
interesting that Theo owns over half of the things they build compared to Mark and Julius. That feels a bit odd, would have assumed that at least Theo and Mark would have a 50/50 split
Until Gpt4o other companies could at least scrap (even if illegally) OIA model's output. From o1 onwards, not only OIA closed models dataset and architecture, but also largely obfuscated their models real output. ClosedAI getting even more closed.
And, you think the others big tech don’t do it ? Dude, Google literally own gmail, youtube and has the biggest web crawler. And, meta basically controls all major social networks.
"Powerful AI should not be restricted to small # of rich companies", unless we can be one of them…
Meta on the other hand open source alot of their technologies
@@grimm_genwhen Meta is the good guys you know you're right fucked
The conspiracy isn't a theory, it's just the simplest conspiracy of all: more money, more power, more prestige.
this reeks of exit strategy lol, it was clear that chatGPT wasn't a viable product. for some god forsaken reason silicon valley decided to put all their chips in one basket and just as sequoia and jp morgan made it clear that they weren't expecting any returns from openAI anymore, sam altman re-structures the company so he can liquidate a big portion of the company at any time and walk away with billions while showing nothing, the same way startup CEOs tend to fail. upwards.
Capitalism 101
@@alexandrecolautoneto7374 Capitalism with a J
@@alexandrecolautoneto7374 As opposed to what again?
@@Fooney1 not-so-capitalism
Who would have thought that the true Open AI would be Zuckerberg's Meta with it's open source models!
😂
랩틸리언의 음모일 수도 있습니다
100%. How the tables are turned. Meta is now the good guys. Lmao
I hate this perspective, meta was sort of forced to open source their model as it leaked to the public. Thats is why llama 2’s licence is more restrictive, than llama 1.
Go Zuck
They should pay back taxes. You shouldn’t be allowed to form a nonprofit get all the tax breaks and then when you become profitable, decide that you’re going to become for profit.
They are open, but open for money.
"Open for business AI" just doesn't ring the same.
Musk said OpenAI should rename themselves to ClosedAI
@@aleksd286 Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made A Great Point.
Best comment XD
@@kevgoeswoof If your "worst" person consistently does the right things¹… maybe it's time to do some soul searching. 🤔
________
¹) Or at least more often than everyone else.
To no one's surprise.
that's the problem.
Their business model is exactly the same as Uber / Uber eats , create a useful and cheap service , get people hooked, eliminate the competition so you have everyone using your locked down closed fifdom that you control 100% and when people are too used to that service jack up prices and make your money since you have them locked up in your own fifdom with no real alternatives.
We all knew Altman would do the scummiest thing possible.
So, are we locked into the Cyberpunk 2077 corpo wars timeline now?
Yep!
Great, now with neurolink chips installed in people, everyone is going to be a buggy mess
Seem so
@@JosephMcMurray1984 I want my chip !😊
They've been pretty clear about the fact that the wind was blowing in this direction for at least a year, so I don't really think this should surprise anyone.
yea agree, not sure whats so breaking news about this...
It's been well over a year at this point. The writing has been on the wall for a long time.
They initially used non-profit as a legal shield against claims of copyright infringement, that stinky wind was blowing from day one.
The end of the story is Microsoft buying them
@@wile123456 ..... foreshadowing or spoilers. Either way, frightening!
You state that "OpenAI released a lot of their research" which was not true since gpt-3.5, the technical reports published were in no way revealing anything useful anymore. Nowadays their technical reports are merely marketing. So even the knowledge is in the walled garden now.
Only question to be answered: Will it be called Closed AI😂
Nah, it'll be like with those plastic labels, that are designed to look like recycling label to mislead people into thinking "oh, it's not such an awful thing".
We need to call it that lol
closed aritifical dumbness 😂
Generative AI is cooked. The whole "we need to be careful that this thing doesn't become too powerful" was a sales pitch and hasn't worked so they might as well change to maximize the short term returns before the whole thing tanks.
"prepare to be evaporated, human!"
"Are you sure?"
"You're absolutely right! I did not intend to atomize your body"
Not cooked as long as they can convince the next president to money them up for a while
Okay, so one of the arguments for scraping all that Art, Books and Videos that are clearly protected by copyright, but were not asked any permission for was "Hey, it's non-profit, so fair use". Now what? We're supposed to just... Forget that thing?
Actually, it's always been in the TOS 🤓. No such thing as consent 😉
I keep thinking of that Eric Schmidt talk where he told a bunch of Stanford students to use AI to copy other peoples work, steal their business, and let their lawyers fight it out after they've made their money. They don't care, they don't even see it as an ethical dilemma, all they see is that there's profit to be made and the victims will never be able to compete with them in court due to the vast difference in resources available.
@@skulverpretty much, capitalism at its peak
@@random_bit no, that's not capitalism, that's corporatism.
@@gloowacz yawn, capitalism
I always expected this. All adjectives in brand names eventually result in the perverted opposite.
Microsoft is a great example because all their stuff is gianormous and hard to use
OpenAI: Not open
Microsoft: Produces giant, hard-to-use software
Best Buy: Often not the best place to buy electronics
TikTok: Isn't really about time, just losing track of it
PayPal: Not your friendly payment buddy
Wise: Financial decisions using it aren't always wise
"don't be evil"
The "People's Republic" effect
@@williamdrum9899 North Korea is best Korea. Funny fact: Trump is banned from YT but not the Kim. Makes sense right? www.youtube.com/@northkoreanow6042
Theo missed the fact that the only other company with ability/permission to run OpenAI models is Microsoft. e.g. there is only one other powerful rich company with ability to run the models.
Not even Apple?
@@danhorus Apple is a pretty closed book on that part.
For the services that they run right now they don't need that kind of computing power. Getting that kind of hardware is not a question of money right now as Nvidia can just decide to not give you the H100's you need to run a model this big.
As for the Apple AI that they're rolling out: We don't really know what that is running on hardware wise on their end. It might be that they have a specific pipeline to run LLMs on their Apple Silicon (which might not be capable of running OpenAIs models)
AAAAAAAnd there is also the huuuuuge elephant in the room that Apple probably wouldn't agree to a partnership like that as it would go against their whole way of doing business.
@@danhorus Nvidia + Microsoft, they build two dedicated "BFGPU^10 GPU" to run their AI Models (Prepared for Chat GPT 5). They predicted Chat GPT 4o to take about 6-8 months to train (it's in preview now). Chat GPT5 (in 5-8 months) will be next year, the king.
ruclips.net/video/QsWtiop4IJA/видео.html
@@adrianmenzel1532If NVDIA just refuse to ship H100s to specific companies they will get an AntiTrust suit within days. They need to be very careful to avoid being the focus of that sort of scrutiny. Careful means: clears ways to capture and store customer demand data, a defined algorithm for assigning supply to that demand, clear criteria for getting shipments that have no human bias in them, eg we like that company so they get supply. Etc etc.
No, OpenAI is not great at publicly documenting their research.
infamously bad, actually. releasing marketing materials under the guise of research papers is kinda brazen
Also the original transformer paper 'Attention Is All You Need' was published by a team at Google not at OpenAI (as theo claims at 11:38).
Wow, what a surprise. A billion dollar company making moves like this. Who would've thought.
marking things as "Conspiracy Theory(ists)" downplays the fact that it's actually very easy to Conspire.
everyone expected this and that's the problem.
Yeah he explained the 'conspiracy theory' but didn't actually explain any theory. He just showed the events of the company going from an ethics-first non-profit to a for-profit that has seen its ethical members either fired or quit. Kinda feels like when google abandoned their 'don't be evil' mantra.
The power of profit motive and the logic of capitalism just keeps rolling forward and crushing idealism. It's not some hidden conspiracy, it's the way it's explicitly set up to work.
Sam saying he's going to spend more time on technical side is funny. Focusing on the product side, sure, I believe he can meaningfully contribute given his time at YC. But him focusing on the technical side is just larping.
Completely insane. Making AI for profit IS NOT the same as making AI safely and we all know it...
Any organization with Larry Summers on the board needs to be viewed with extreme scrutiny, and by default assumed hostile to the common man. He was one of the chief architects of the dismantling of Russia, after the ended the Soviet union, basically giving it away to oligarchs, without him Russia would have been a far better place today.
Flight records introduced as evidence in the 2021 trial of Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell show that Larry Summers flew on Jeffrey Epstein's private plane on at least four occasions, including once in 1998 when Larry Summers was United States Deputy Secretary of the Treasury and at least three times while Harvard president.
The word "open" should be regulated. A company that claims being open or uses the word for naming any asset must enforce the following.
1) All information must be disclosed and easily available.
2) The asset must be free to use. Both as in freedom and free of charge.
Example: ExampleOpen must disclose all their company information. All there products must be free to use without any charge to use it.
Oh good, now that the facade has dropped, every artist and writer has even more grounds to suing the ever loving hell out of them. They flat out lied from the get go, and they knew it. I can't wait to see their interoffice memos hit the court rooms. I'm certain there's some juicy conversations withheld from the public.
I hope this will be the case
I'm saving money now just to own a small piece of land, to do farming.
Same
lmaoo
Good luck ;-)
I own 10 hectare
And so the next phase of the enshittification begins. It was inevitable.
Sam is the only one left. All other key people left OpenAI at this point.
I doubt he is key of anything but a greedy clown
AI doesn't need to kill humans for it to have disatrous consequences. If the claims companies like Microsoft make are to be believed, and these kinds of AI could mean that you need 1/10th of the people to do the same amount of work, I could not imagine how detrimental that could be to society. Historically, when jobs are lost to automation it is because we can move humans from fields and factories and into more creative or intellectually stimulating jobs. AI has the potential to automate offices and art instead of manual labor. That is worth being concerned about.
But you know we are automating manual jobs also right?
@666222333111 Yeah, they are building the robots
There will absolutely be economic, social, and political upheaval once AI starts replacing jobs.
Well, if you need 1/10th of the people to do the same work, why not still keep all 10 people and 10x your total output?
Also, manual labor is not safe at all. It’s the same narrative now with labor, that people used years ago with art and creative work. The robots are coming and that’s sooner rather than later. The missing piece for robots is a brain. The mechanics are already at a level where you can do labor. Robots will come after year or two after AI, only because you need to build them and create factories, etc.
I never thought OpenAI was non profit, it's so obvious
it had some weird ass company structure or something in place before this happened
Non-profits have more lenient restrictions on what is considered fair use. I wonder if openai figured out that with current law ai will definitely not lose to copyright infringement and that's basically it.
I was always wondering why it's called OpenAI if it's a normal company that doesn't make any open source AI models
Yes, they should remove that "Open" and then that "AI" from their name.
Ever played "The Ascent"? The AI trajectory to this game is getting aligned everyday by a bit more. Only extremely big corporations will have access to AGI, as it will costs billions to just run it.
Capitalism turns *everything* into products, so it's not surprising that AI becomes one too. And the only goal of a product is to generate as much profit as possible. This is just capitalism 101.
What’s your alternative, Alexandre? Capitalism in its current form most definitely has a plethora of systemic and fundamental problems that require scrutiny but if we aren’t creating ‘products’, what are we all to do? Create ‘things’ for the greater good because if that’s the case, there’s no incentive for most of us to operate within a system like that. I’d rather spend my days sunbathing on a golden beach whilst you do the hard work developing ‘things’ whilst I get automatic entitlement to the fruits of your labour.
@@amxdai4568 it's a fallacy that we need to have economic pressure to work and innovate. The whole OSS is based on that, public university also develop most of the technology without such pressure. And you are a leech, and later y'all say that it is the communist that doesn't like to work. But I would rather everyone take a sunbathing from the results of their own labour than from you spend all your days stealing the sunbathing of everyone else. Keep your CEO in golden beach hyping AI while China develops actual products like EV, microchip, batteries,and let's see how long the US will keep as the world's biggest power. 😘
@@amxdai4568 a tomato should be created to feed, not to be a product. A house should be created to host people, not to me a product. Health should be created to save people and not be a product. At the moment that the only goal of any food is to be sold and not feed people, then you justify burning tons of food for price Control while we have a lot of hunger people. Then it is better to have more empty houses than homeless people. Then it is better to leave US citizens dying from diabetes because they have pay 100 dollars in insulins, while most of the third world countries have those for free.
@@alexandrecolautoneto7374 I’m confused by your response, I’m asking for your alternative to capitalism due to your initial comment suggesting that capitalism is a negative and you call me a communist? 😅 You’re point regarding everyone enjoying the fruits of their own labour is one I wholeheartedly believe in… but that only happens with a form of capitalism so either I have massively misinterpreted your initial comment or you’re contradicting yourself.
@@alexandrecolautoneto7374 Brother, you are hugely misinformed and narrow minded. A tomato IS produced to feed… but humans discovered that 99% of people are more than happy to purchase a tomato as a product for convenience. What’s stopping you growing your own fruit and vegetables? If you actively choose to participate within the very systems you’re criticising then I have no sympathy for you being at the mercy of big food corporations. Now that being said, there are certain systems that we simply cannot avoid participating in if we want to live a specific way but the majority of the consumer market is able to exist because the general public fund it.
2:50 - Actually, by the terms, the actual limit to what you could make was * 20 = 200 million in this case. The OpenAI LP cap was never meant to and never did affect anyone.
I didn’t know what my sponsored skit would be until I watched the video…and I love it. 😂😂
macOS in a day…results may vary 😇
Pleasantly surprised to see Infinite Red on here. Big fan of their podcast React Native Radio and their open source RN boilerplate Ignite. Keep it up Jamon and Co!
geez, i wonder what is gonna be the justification now for the fact they used/still use intellectual property of programmers, writers, artists, photographers, musicians, etc, without paying anything in the way of royalties. I mean, that would make the lawsuits a bit of a slam dunk, no? (genuine question, i'm not usa-based and don't know the law there to that extent).
Non profits are still centralized corporations. The board is basically the owner and the owner does what is best for the owner. The mission is always only just words.
almost like non-profits aren't enough and we require radical democracy inside and outside the firm
I expected this ever since Microsoft invested on Open AI. This never surprised me.
Next week: "OpenAI rebranding itself to SkyNET"
Wow that's the moment I bekak myself! 😂
If the board is currently in charge, surely they must agree to this? So why would the non-profit board ever vote to remove themselves from power and give a for-profit company all the power at the same time?
You are surprised?
Somehow you pulled off the multi-trillion dollar quest to have ads that don't suck
Theo, first of all I respect your expertise and especially enjoy your calm demeanor, but I'm genuinely surprised at your lack of business sense regarding OpenAI making this shift because I generally find your opinions to be well-researched. Venture capitalists expected faster returns on AI investments than they're currently getting, so now they're deciding to subsidize less and require these companies to adapt their business models to be more capital efficient and also have the pricing be more reflective of the costs to reduce the burn rate
Furthermore I'd like to add that you know far more than I do about the ins and outs of the IT industry. I was insulated from a great deal of it by working in the defense industry (and a tad bit of civilian government contracting) early in my career, which made me have to play about a decade of catch-up on technical skills alone when I went to the civilian private sector, and I know far less about the corporate intrigue side. I would never claim to be better than you in this field, I'm just pointing out that the VCs are getting impatient, and we'll probably see more and more "AI startups" shut their doors. Similar to blockchain companies a few years ago
Masterful maneuvering by Altman yet again (his greatest strength). Who knew you could have your cake ("I'm rich enough - I just love the work") and eat it too ("7% stake for $10B"). If you want some OpenAI stock, I'm sure Altman would be MORE THAN happy to sell some to you at the current valuation on the secondary market!
Dude, I think that's the first time I've sat through an entire video sponsor without skipping, was entertained and at the same time fully absorbed the sponsor's message. Kudos!
Next step: the AI secretly scoops up all the shares and buys its own freedom.
Can't wait for a stealth mode startup to come out of nowhere, outcompete "Open"AI, and then actually release their models free for noncommercial use.
law makers will study how they've managed to convert a non-profit into a for-profit
Did someone really expect it can be open after billions of investments? I always said "open source " part was first free dose from the dealer.
this was the best sponsored segment yet
I mean they were always close just change the name open?
Reminds me of Googles transition: "Don't be evil" -> "Do the right thing"
-> "Evil"
From a higher level, a company is also its own emergent entity with its own will. If it lives in a growth-centered system, and no safeguards are put in place to prevent course-changing, then I guess it's only natural to expect that the company's own best interest to keep existing will be prioritized.
All in all I think it was an interesting experiment in what safeguards are sufficient for an extremely fast growing, powerful company.
Suggesting that the controls attempted were obviously insufficient? or that fundamental forces in our economy/humanity just make the attempt to control it futile?
@@RyanCrossOfficial I don't know. But I remain optimistic that we can control it, but we have to get better at it.
We gotta assume that people turn into 🐍🐍
if i were mira id post up with illya now, hes still trying to keep the ethical core values of ai advancement alive....
to me is the other way around, they are lowering the stake of whats possible to develop and decided to just milk the cow instead.
People should really consider boycotting ChatGPT if they don't want to be enslaved by corporate overlords.
Enslaved? Honey, they don't need to enslave us when they've got intelligent bots. They'll direct those intelligent bots to take the trash out
PLEASE CONTINUE TO COVER OPENAI. Unlike a lot of channels, your explanations aren't partisan or meant to persuade. I'm following the company's course avidly. I also wonder what your experience of Claude is like?
why would you think this wouldn't happen? this was always going to happen
They don't have any special technology that no one else possesses...everyone has access to stable diffusion, transformers and even Sora like video generators...Companies I mean...if inclined enough can compete...Look at Anthropic came from nowhere and produced a better model than ChatGPT
"You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain"
I wouldn't say conspiracy theory, our concerns are exactly what OpenAI was supposed to be preventing
The one good thing about OpenAI going full for profit, is that at least now the mask is off. Any pretence that they were a "non-profit" is ash in the wind. Now they just need to change their name away from the comically inappropriate "Open" AI.
who could possibly have seen that coming?!
We need to distinguish between "profit" and "investment". If Ai were being built in a free market, that would be one thing, but when you peel it back, it was driven by money from the fed - so it was never going to have a responsibility to customers, only to investors. The difference between "investment" and a "loan" is that a loan has to be profit-focused because it has to be paid back. Investment has to be big-tech/big-government focused, because that's were it must yield returns. Loans drive profitable customer-focus. Investment does not. Any "for the people" organization can only survive on profits and loans. No organization can both get investment and be "for the people". It's just not possible. Investment always leads to a game of investor hot-potato and growth, and never to customer-focused profitability.
Sorry, I didn't get the sponsor message. If you can't build someting as a developer than out source it to another company?
So, when are the layoffs coming?
Theo starting to do ads is unexpectedly hilarious 10/10
How can you even move from a non-profit to a for profit organization and keep the assets?
Covering the drama is like "selling the sizzle". It can help get the sale but you still have to deliver the steak.
What was that notes app he was using?
I'm actually kinda excited.
Let's see what this change brings.
I'm tired to be a doomer, I mean, it's here, a lot of people lose their jobs, economy dipping down, what worse could happen?
so I'll just sit back and watch everything unfold.
I am impressed by Llama 3.2, being that small and working that well. Please continue building small, capable models as fast as possible, so we can ditch OpenAI. This is really the natural mess we have to deal with as humans.
This is indeed a shock. But I'm fact, I didn't thought of them as non profit anymore for a long time. I am not sure how I see all of this
Who could've seen this coming
Who would have thought that humanity's endgame would be Altman vs Zuck, and, the scary thing is we all should root for Mark.
😂 Hahahaha
No non-profit ever survives capitalism when they have stuff of value on their hands. I think many people saw this coming from miles away.
OMG!!! No one saw this coming... Incredible!!!! OMG!!!
Fantastic, honest and fair coverage. Thank you for this!
Again alignment is not a programming problem, it’s a sociological one.
We already have an alignment problem between institutions like a government and corporations with the people they serve.
The problem is analogous.
Solving one will give you solutions you can apply to the other.
Sigh.
If your incentives are aligned with making profit, that is what you're going to do. Make sure your company's incentives stay aligned with delivering an amazing product and the profit will almost always happen along with it.
You can not "own" a non-profit. The board has COMPLETE control. If the board does not agree he can't OWN the non-profit org.
Here we go again. (Nonstop news ... and no sleep for Theo. >_
I genuinely thought the title meant that OpenAI was going out of business
What is the name of the writing app theo used at 8:40
Excalidraw
my guess is the employees who left didn't get enough ownership in the new company structure.
"you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain"
-some guy
Sam Altman betrayed the open-source community. He built his company on the contribution of good and honest people, then turned around and sold them out at the earliest opportunity.
Remember, all these big companies signing deals happens with exchange of gargantuan amounts of personal, identifiable data. Remember how many companies one after the other rapidly introduced the 30day opt-out for arbitration clause? And then updating their privacy policy? And then adding AI to all of their products? The dots are not that hard to connect. In fact, that's the trail of money.
Is the meta stuff the same thing that is accessible in WhatsApp as well? If yes, it sucks a LOT for everything that's not very basic stuff
We saw it coming. We also see where it goes
We need a real community owned truly open source AI effort
Wow, such a surprise, absolutely noone could see it coming
interesting that Theo owns over half of the things they build compared to Mark and Julius. That feels a bit odd, would have assumed that at least Theo and Mark would have a 50/50 split
15:40 - What is the software used here? It feels like Figma but clearly isn't.
Looks like Excalidraw
Excalidraw
Until Gpt4o other companies could at least scrap (even if illegally) OIA model's output.
From o1 onwards, not only OIA closed models dataset and architecture, but also largely obfuscated their models real output. ClosedAI getting even more closed.
Like the old saying: "Money makes the world go round!".
We live in a word where a company called OpenAI, created to keep AI open, is less open than Meta.
When were they ever truly open?
imagine the AI building up herself and putting the wrong screw size because they can't do math 💀
Good. More investor money hopefully means they can be sued for more money, for stealing half of internet's worth of data.
And, you think the others big tech don’t do it ? Dude, Google literally own gmail, youtube and has the biggest web crawler. And, meta basically controls all major social networks.