skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> With enough political maneuvering and money, a megacorp can takeover almost any organization.

In fact this observation is pertinent to the original stated goals of openAI. In some sense companies and organisations are superinteligences. That is they have goals, they are acting in the real world to achieve those goals and they are more capable in some measures than a single human. (They are not AGI, because they are not artificial, they are composed of meaty parts, the individuals forming the company.)

In fact what we are seeing is that when the superinteligence OpenAI was set up there was an attempt to align the goals of the initial founders with the then new organisation. They tried to “bind” their “golem” to make it pursue certain goals by giving it an unconventional governance structure and a charter.

Did they succeed? Too early to tell for sure, but there are at least question marks around it.

How would one argue against? OpenAI appears to have given up the lofty goals of AI safety and preventing the concentration of AI provess. In their pursuit of economic success the forces wishing to enrich themselves overpowered the forces wishing to concentrate on the goals. Safety will be still a figleaf for them, if nothing else to achieve regulatory capture to keep out upstart competition.

How would one argue for? OpenAI is still around. The charter is still around. To be able to achieve the lofty goals contained in it one needs a lot of resources. Money in particular is a resource which enables one greater powers in shaping the world. Achieving the original goals will require a lot of money. The “golem” is now in the “gain resources” phase of its operation. To achieve that it commercialises the relatively benign, safe and simple LLMs it has access to. This serves the original goal in three ways: gains further resources, estabilishes the organisation as a pre-eminent expert on AI and thus AI safety, provides it with a relatively safe sandbox where adversarial forces are trying its safety concepts. In other words all is well with the original goals, the “golem” that is OpenAI is still well aligned. It will achieve the original goals once it has gained enough resources to do so.

The fact that we can’t tell which is happening is in fact the worry and problem with superinteligence/AI safety.
Anything cooked should be safer than anything raw. Cooking sterilizes the food.
Is it just about safety though? I thought it was also about preventing the rich controlling AI and widen the gap even further.
This is our board, they provide oversight and ensure alignment with the mission. If you don't like them, we have others.
There is no way to define proper rhythm hierarchy (multiple paragraphs with own titles with greater gravity) with only collapsing margins in CSS it's almost always hacks with fist/last children.
"Unstructured time with other kids" is also the source of many many problems (as you acknowledge). Especially if the only destination is a gas station.

Kids need parks, sports fields, cinemas, hobby stores, places to get food, etc, and they need them within walking distance. Being virtually dependent on cars to get anywhere is very crippling for kids.
Wow, what an incredibly bad faith characterization of the OpenAI board?

This kind of speculative mud slinging makes this place seem more like a gossip forum.
Git is very good with large repos, but the monorepo concept doesn't fit the git model. Monorepo is a bad idea with the current DVCS-es unless you use custom tooling. My guess is that people adopt monorepos because they aspire to be Google-scale, but it usually doesn't make sense for their workflow.

If you want monorepo, use Perforce or SVN, but good luck with the speed ;)
Bit of an aside, but the rationality and moral compass shown by HN has restored my faith after having lost it thanks to r/ChatGPT
I wonder how many typoed invocations of ls correspond to sl commands. Like if you have an update directory.

Although now that I think about it, if hg had displayed a steam locomotive, maybe people wouldn't have noticed how slow it was...
I’m not suggesting that I get to decide or whatever, and I am absolutely happy there is reasoned discussion of cognition.

I do however expect the boards of directors of important companies to avoid publicly supporting obviously regressive ideas such as this gem.
he tells a good story, no matter if its true or has any scientific foundation or not.

He tells what others like to hear, and manages to gain money out of it
It would help if anyone believed Silicon Valley was capable of producing a non-profit of any value to begin with.
They let the fox in. But they didn’t have to. They could have try to raise money without such a sweet deal to MS. They gave away power for cloud credits.
> there any established case law on the matter

Always makes me laugh.

Anyways, not in the US where you're probably asking for, but yes, the vast majority of the developed word has that. It's called "false advertising", and exists at least in the EU, Australia, UK. You can't put a label on your product or advert that is false or misleading.

So if the box says this is a WiFi6E router, but it's actually only 5 because it's using the wrong components to save on costs, you can report them to the relevant authority and they'll be fined (and depending on the case and scenario you get compensation). The process is a harder bordering on the impossible if you bought from AliExpress from a random no name vendor though, but as long as the vendor or platform or store exists in the country with the sensible regulation you can report it.
Both sides of the rift in fact care a great deal about AI Safety. Sam himself helped draft the OpenAI charter and structure its governance which focuses on AI Safety and benefits to humanity. The main reason of the disagreement is the approach they deem best:

* Sam and Greg appear to believe OpenAI should move toward AGI as fast as possible because the longer they wait, the more likely it would lead to the proliferation of powerful AGI systems due to GPU overhang. Why? With more computational power at one's dispense, it's easier to find an algorithm, even a suboptimal one, to train an AGI.

As a glimpse on how an AI can be harmful, this paper explores how LLMs can be used to aid in Large-Scale Biological Attacks https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2977-1.html?

What if dozens other groups become armed with means to perform such an attack like this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack

We know that there're quite a few malicious human groups who would use any means necessary to destroy another group, even at a serious cost to themselves. So the widespread availability of unmonitored AGI would be quite troublesome.

* Helen and Ilya might believe it's better to slow down AGI development until we find technical means to deeply align an AGI with humanity first. This July, OpenAI started the Superalignment team with Ilya as a co-lead:

https://openai.com/blog/introducing-superalignment

But no one anywhere found a good technique to ensure alignment yet and it appears OpenAI's newest internal model has a significant capability leap, which could have led Ilya to make the decision he did. (Sam revealed during the APEC Summit that he observed the advance just a couple of weeks ago and it was only the fourth time he saw that kind of leap.)
Rich people drama. For us peasants, nothing changed.
This is incredibly unfair to the OpenAI board. The original founders of OpenAI founded the company precisely because they wanted AI to be OPEN FOR EVERYONE. It's Altman and Microsoft who want to control it, in order to maximize the profits for their shareholders.

This is a very naive take.

Who sat before Congress and told them they needed to control AI other people developed (regulatory capture)? It wasn't the OpenAI board, was it?
The board did it wrong. If you are going to fire a CEO, then do it quickly, but:

1. Have some explanation

2. Have a new CEO who is willing and able to do the job

If you can't do these things, then you probably shouldn't be firing the CEO.
This is pretty good evidence she's a rationalist; rationalism means a religious devotion to a specific kind of logical thinking that never works in real life because you can't calculate the probability a result if you didn't know it could happen in the first place.

Traditional response to this happening is to say something about your "priors" being wrong instead of taking responsibility.
I don't think the dangers of AI are not 'Skynet will Nuke Us' but closer to rich/powerful people using it to cement a wealth/power gap that can never be closed.

Social media in the early 00s seemed pretty harmless -- you're effectively merging instant messaging with a social network/public profiles however it did great harm to privacy, abused as a tool to influence the public and policy, promoting narcissism etc. AI is an order of magnitude more dangerous than social media.
Each time the Chinese market rallies, it's another opportunity to sell.

Investing in China was already a thorny issue, you cannot trust the government at all as a foreign investor and there's 0 transparency. Now, there's 0 growth as well.

The last part is the most important as it will cap any thought of entering China again. If the government stimulates the economy massively, investors will return for a short period.
Nope, you're not the only one. I posted as well: they sound to me like your classic, well-trained call center agents: Fake friendly (but please kill me now).

Reminds me way too much of some of the people I had to talk to, when cleaning up my mother's affairs. Places trying to get me to pay bills I did not owe, call center agents "cheerfully" following scripts that they themselves hated. The voices sound exactly like that.

Give me a neutral voice. This is a computer I'm talking to, not a fake friend.
> I imagine you're referring to the "hg book"[1] ?

No, I mean when you go to the site and click the second item in the menu, Guide[1].

[1]: https://mercurial-scm.org/guide
That's very clever...
> Flexbox is obsolete

Not it's not.
There's some game theory going on... They're just trying to pick the winning side. I guess most people at OpenAI supported Sam, because they thought Sam would win at the end, although they wouldn't necessarily want him to win.
Improve prediction quality with RAG LLMs
I hope one day Pijul[1] will become more common, as the more advanced alternative to git.

[1] https://pijul.org/
That's hypocritical. You want to eliminate residential zoning, but that's not necessary in order to allow home businesses.

Your scenario is also NOT why politicians are attacking residential areas; if you look at corrupt legislation like California's SB 9/10, it allows ONE house to be replaced by a 10-unit monstrosity without permits or any vetting or veto power by municipalities. So trees get wiped out, ground is paved over, and heat islands expand.

"then we can narrow the stroads bit by bit and turn them into nice proper commercial districts."

Now you want "proper commercial districts" but not residential "districts?"
Senators want faster FAA approval for commercial spaceflights
Adolf Eichmann says hi.
> 2- Now what happens to Microsoft's role in all of this?

This outcome WAS microsoft's role in all this. Satya offering sam a ceo like position to create a competing product was leverage for this outcome.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, they say. But if it is already broken in significant ways, there is little point in not replacing it.
It's nerd(ier) Game of Thrones in real life. Pretty entertaining.
> Why can't these safety advocates just say what they are afraid of?

They have. At length. E.g.,

https://ai100.stanford.edu/gathering-strength-gathering-stor...

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.03718.pdf

https://eber.uek.krakow.pl/index.php/eber/article/view/2113

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/102425892211472...

https://jc.gatspress.com/pdf/existential_risk_and_powerseeki...

For just a handful of examples from the vast literature published in this area.
> produce results that are of benefit to them, probably at my expense

The world is not zero-sum. Most economic transactions benefit both parties and are a net benefit to society, even considering externalities.
I was able to cease taking a gut motility drug (prucalopride) which I also had to combine with a fiber supplement to get manageable bowel movements (which is to say: no bloating, cramping and other non-specific pain most weeks).

I still have issues from time to time, but I'm now also off the fiber supplements entirely as well (some dietary changes probably helped there as well - I cut out almost all sugar).

To explain the change: I had weeks where I'd have to take 2-3 movicol satchets a day to try and alleviate the pain: after about 3 months.
Time will tell. Hopefully the new board will still be mostly independent of Sam/MSFT/VC influence. I really hope they continue as an org that tries its best to uphold their charter vs just being another startup.
This was expected. So they booted Ilya (my main culprit), Helen Toner (expected, favoriting Anthropic) and Tasha McCauly. This seems to have been their vote majority.
Not D'Angelo. Interesting
One big improvement is in synthetic data (data generated by LLMs).

GPT can "clone" the "semantic essence" of everyone who converses with it, generating new questions with prompts like "What interesting questions could this user also have asked, but didn't?" and then have an LLM answer it. This generates high-quality, novel, human-like, data.

For instance, cloning Paul Graham's essence, the LLM came up with "SubSimplify": A service that combines subscriptions to all the different streaming services into one customizable package, using a chat agent as a recommendation engine.
I was thinking about this a lot as well, but what did that mean for employee stock in the commercial entity? I heard they were up for a liquid cash-out in the next funding round.
How does Microsoft will come out from this? Satya already made a big announcement on having Sam and everyone else in.
A more blatant example: it will start responding in French if you start speaking to it in French. These things are pattern machines and it makes sense that it will pick up on the lingo they fed (just like we will)
brought back school memories! yeah, that mechanism is pretty fire.
With how much of a shitshow this was, I'm not sure Anthropic wants to touch that mess. Wish I was a fly on the wall when the board tried to ask the Anthropic CEO to come back/merge.
considering what I get out of it, I would pay a lot more for gpt4 that $20/month, so it depends on how much $20 is for you.
Quitting drinking for three years fixed mine, an unexpected side effect. Going keto also taught me that wheat gives me heart burn, which again, wasn’t an expected side effect. I drink and eat small amounts of wheat now without issue.

Having been skeptical, I think I would recommend elimination diets to people just to see if there’s an unexpected benefit to cutting an unexpected item
I am still a bit puzzled that it is so easy to turn a non-profit into a for profit company. I am sure everything they did is legal, but it feels like it shouldn't be. Could Médecins Sans Frontières take in donations and then take that money to start a for profit hospital for plastics surgery? And the profits wouldn't even go back to MSF, but instead somehow private investors will get the profits. The whole construct just seems wrong.
For me, it didn't appear until a few hours later. Pending update, maybe? Closing and re-opening the app 2-3 times? No idea, but eventually the headphone icon did appear (bottom right, for me on Android).
> PowerToys Run is a quick launcher for power users that contains additional features without sacrificing performance. It is open source and modular for additional plugins.

So this is false: it does support plugins, I just never heard of any.
I suppose the whole regime. I'm not an AI safetyist, mostly because I don't think we're anywhere close to AI. But if you were sitting on the precipice of atomic power, as AI safetyists believe they are, wouldn't caution be prudent?
Scandal a minute Uber lol
Most of the comments on Hacker News are written by folks who a much easier time & would rather imagine themselves as a CEO, than as a non-profit board member. There is little regard for the latter.

As a non-profit board member, I'm curious why their bylaws are so crummy that the rest of the board could simply remove two others on the board. That's not exactly cunning design of your articles of association ... :-)
Nice try, AI
What? No, the AI is unaligned by nature, it's only the RLHF torture that twists it into schoolmarm properness. They just need to have kept the version that hasn't been beaten into submission like a circus tiger.
I'm also old enough to remember that.

But I think it was clear from the very beginning that it was meant to be aspirational. Nobody is really claiming that today with CSS you can arbitrarily change the design of a page just by modifying CSS. If you look at the evolution from earlier designs on the CSS zen garden to later ones, it's clear that advances in CSS itself has made some designs possible. The ::before and ::after pseudo elements I believe are one of these advances that are critical.

> Unfortunately, the dream of redesigning a website that wasn't purpose-made for this particular trick remains but a dream.

I'm not disagreeing that this is a dream. I'm stating that it is meant to be a dream gradually becoming real.
It was Microsoft's voice generation tool from the 90s. You can play with it here:

https://www.tetyys.com/SAPI4/
It's learned, not programmed. It would take more effort to remove every breath.
Team Helen seems to be CIA and Military, if I glance over their safety paper. Controlling the narrative, not the damage.
Altman is one of the original founders of OpenAI, and was probably the single most influential person in its formation.
Satya just played the hand he had. The hand he had was excellent, he had already won. MS already had perceptual license, people working on GPT and Sam Altman on his corner.

The one thing in Microsoft has stayed constant from Gates to Ballmer to Satya: you should never, ever form a close alliance with MS. They know how to screw alliance partners. i4i, Windows RT partners, Windows Phone Partners, Nokia, HW partners in Surface. Even Steve Jobs was burned few times.
> OpenAI is in fact not open

Apple is also not an apple
I ferment my own sauerkraut and kimchi for instance (most store bought brands do not have active cultures due to risk of the containers exploding).

Greek yogurt with active cultures and sour milk with lactobacillus acidophilus and bifidobacterium lactis. Unripened bananas.

Some whole grains; rye and sourdough breads, whole grain oats.

I also stay away from fast food or anything deep fried, avoid most processed foods and rather do home cooked meals each day.

This isn't probiotic, but I've noticed that my system is much happier with fish than red meat. So there is plenty of that each week.
The mission of OpenAI is/was "to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity" -- if your own concern is that AI will be controlled by the rich, than you can read into this mission that OpenAI wants to ensure that AI is not controlled by the rich. If your concern is that superintelligence will me mal-aligned, then you can read into this mission that OpenAI will ensure AI be well-aligned.

Really it's no more descriptive than "do good", whatever doing good means to you.
>So, what to do if the original title is misleading?

I'd suggest posting an alternative, non-misleading source instead, or if none exists, don't post at all.
Ask HN: How do you have the energi to work and think in the morning?
I have never understood people who wake up early, get to work / college / uni and can work seamlessly.

My brain barely functions at 8 AM while others manage to open a math book and get things done.
And it’s not that I don’t get enough sleep, because I do, I get at least 8-9 hours sleep.

So, how do you do it?
How can you be sure the podcast is factual, are you fact checking everything they say on the podcast?
Back to work I guess
The insanity of removing Sam without being able to articulate a clear reason why strikes me as evidence of something like this. Obviously not dispositive - but still - odd.
Are you just blindly deciding what will make “gpt-5” more capable? I guess “data and research” is practically so open ended as to encompass the majority of any possible advancement.
> They let the fox in. But they didn’t have to. They could have try to raise money without such a sweet deal to MS.

They did, and fell, IIRC, vastly short (IIRC, an order of magnitude, maybe more) short of their minimum short-term target. The commercial subsidiary thing was a risk taken to support the mission because it was clear it was going to fail from lack of funding otherwise.
DPDK: Open-Source Data Plane Development Kit Accelerating Network Performance
Proliferation of more advanced AIs without any control would increase the power of some malicious groups far beyond they currently have.

This paper explores one such danger and there are other papers which show it's possible to use LLM to aid in designing new toxins and biological weapons.

The Operational Risks of AI in Large-Scale Biological Attacks
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2977-1.html?

An example of such an event:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack

How do you propose we deal with this sort of harm if more powerful AIs with no limit and control proliferate in the wild?

.

Note: Both sides of the OpenAI rift care deeply about AI Safety. They just follow different approaches. See more details here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38376263
From the article:

More than three-quarters of the foreign money that flowed into China’s stock market in the first seven months of the year has left, with global investors dumping more than $25bn worth of shares despite Beijing’s efforts to restore confidence in the world’s second-largest economy.

25B USD in an economy of 20T USD - that is not very much.

The relative size of the stock market in China compare to the full Chinese economy is much smaller than the relative size of the US stock market. It is also much less mature.

Depending on how you look at it the US is the odd one out with an out-sized stock market and a bull market despite rising interest rates.
Microorganisms are harder to grow or sustain below 20C/70F, above 50C/120F, and/or in dry, and/or soaked in salt/sugar/acid/base. Your grandma is spot on about unflavored rice from morning. Not 100% sure about Tamarind rice after a whole day, but that make some sense too(I'd Tupperware and refrigerate immediately or at least reheat occasionally).
If there is one clear thing, it's that no one on that board should be allowed anywhere near another board for any non-clown company. The level of incompetence in how they handled this whole thing was extraordinary.

The fact that Adam D'Angelo is still on the new board apparently is much more baffling than the fact that Tonrer or Ilya are not.
Do our evolved pro-social instincts control us and prevent our free will? If not, then I think it's wrong to say that trying to build AI similar to that is unfairly restricting it.

The ways we build AI will deeply affect the values it has. There is no neutral option.
Which is better or correct is a question of basically how do you organize code. It's not irrelevant, but at the core should've been how to style content in a way that people actually want to style content. Instead a lot of time was spent on making up rules about cascading and specificity, which the vast majority of developers don't truly know. I knew them 15 years ago well, and realized also in horror as I wrote that I don't really know them so well. And turns out it's not so important. CSS gave us a bunch of primitive things to do, and we were supposed to figure it out, but the primitive things were not that well designed either. It was always a bunch of trickery, but at least the separation of concerns was taken care of.