BREAKING: OpenAI Reveals the TRUTH About Elon Musk's Lawsuit 🔥
Summary
TLDR这段视频剧本详细剖析了OpenAI和Elon Musk之间关于人工智能开发的争议和起诉。OpenAI披露了Musk当初希望将OpenAI并入特斯拉,获得实际控制权的内部邮件。双方在是否应该开源人工通用智能(AGI)技术的问题上存在分歧。OpenAI主张在开发出AGI后,将其成果对外开放使用,但技术细节不会公开。该剧本还引发了关于如何安全发展AGI的深层次探讨,让观众对这一前沿议题有更深入的了解。
Takeaways
- 📜 OpenAI回应了Elon Musk的诉讼,并揭示了新信息以及Elon Musk、Sam Altman、Ilya Sutskever和Greg Brockman之间的内部电子邮件。
- 🚀 Elon Musk起初推动OpenAI进行大规模融资,认为初始1亿美元的资金承诺不足以与Google或Facebook竞争,建议总资金承诺达到10亿美元。
- 💡 OpenAI成立初期,面临着如何以非盈利组织形式筹集大量资金的挑战,因为这种模式下的资金来源不期望获得任何回报。
- 🔍 Elon Musk、Greg Brockman和Sam Altman早期认识到,为了实现OpenAI的使命,需要大量的资金,主要用于计算资源。
- 🤔 OpenAI和Elon Musk之间存在分歧,特别是关于如何筹集所需的大量资金,以及是否将OpenAI转变为盈利性实体。
- 📊 Elon Musk提议将OpenAI并入特斯拉,或由他全权控制,但因担心这违背了OpenAI的使命,双方未能就此达成一致。
- 🤖 OpenAI的信件和邮件表明,尽管Elon Musk提出了将OpenAI转为盈利性实体的想法,但他并未明确要求将AGI关闭源代码。
- 💼 在Elon Musk退出OpenAI后,他表示要在特斯拉内部建立一个与OpenAI竞争的AGI项目。
- 📈 OpenAI在信中提到,随着AGI的逐步构建,将开始减少开放性,但最终目标是让所有人从AI的成果中受益。
- 👀 事件的核心争议在于,是否应该完全开源AGI,以及如何确保AGI的益处能广泛惠及人类。
Q & A
这份文件揭示了什么新的信息?
-这份文件透露了OpenAI和埃隆·马斯克之间的内部电子邮件往来,以及马斯克想要获得OpenAI控制权并将其并入特斯拉的努力。它还阐述了OpenAI的使命是确保AGI造福全人类,并透露他们认为有必要创建一家盈利性公司来获得足够的资金来实现这一目标。
OpenAI和埃隆·马斯克在筹资问题上存在什么分歧?
-在OpenAI成立之初,马斯克主张宣布10亿美元的初始资金承诺,而格雷格·布罗克曼和萨姆·奥特曼只计划筹集1亿美元。马斯克认为需要大笔资金来实现AGI,而OpenAI的非营利性质使筹资变得困难。
马斯克为什么想要控制OpenAI?
-根据文件中的电子邮件,马斯克认为OpenAI在没有"戏剧性的执行和资源变化"的情况下,与谷歌DeepMind相比成功的概率为零。他希望通过合并或控制OpenAI来增加它与谷歌竞争的机会。
OpenAI拒绝马斯克控制权的原因是什么?
-OpenAI认为,让任何个人完全控制人工通用智能公司都违背了他们的使命。他们不希望单个实体掌控如此强大的技术。
OpenAI在开放性与保密性之间如何权衡?
-OpenAI的立场是,在接近建立AGI时,他们会开始变得不那么开放源代码。他们计划与所有人分享AGI的成果,但不会分享实现AGI的全部科学依据。
电子邮件中透露了什么关于算法进展与计算能力的关系?
-有人在给马斯克的邮件中指出,计算能力可能是达到AGI所必需且足够的条件,而算法进步可能根本不是必需的。任何公开发表的算法进步都可以很快被复制和采用。
OpenAI如何看待自己与谷歌的竞争?
-这份文件显示,OpenAI早期认为很难与谷歌等大公司真正竞争。马斯克甚至曾表示,在没有"戏剧性的执行和资源变化"的情况下,OpenAI与谷歌DeepMind相比成功的概率为零。
马斯克为什么建议OpenAI并入特斯拉?
-据说,马斯克建议OpenAI与特斯拉合并是因为他认为特斯拉是与谷歌竞争的"唯一机会"。他认为特斯拉的供应链、车载计算机和互联网连接为OpenAI提供必要的"现金奶牛"资源。
OpenAI对马斯克的诉讼有何回应?
-OpenAI表示很遗憾与马斯克走到这一步,因为他们"非常钦佩"马斯克,马斯克曾激励他们追求更高目标。但现在马斯克开始了一家竞争对手并起诉了他们。OpenAI要求驳回马斯克的所有索赔。
你更赞同OpenAI还是马斯克的立场?为什么?
-这需要一个全面和平衡的分析。双方都有一定道理,OpenAI希望避免单个实体控制AGI,而马斯克则担心资金不足导致无法与大公司竞争。我倾向于部分支持OpenAI的立场,因为保持AGI的中立性和民主性非常重要,但我也理解马斯克对资源匮乏的担忧。总的来说,这是一个复杂的问题,需要平衡各方利益。
Outlines
😮 开放人工智能与伊隆·马斯克之间的争议和电子邮件透露
本段介绍了开放人工智能回应伊隆·马斯克的诉讼,披露了双方之间早期电子邮件往来的内容。伊隆·马斯克最初推动募集10亿美元资金支持开放人工智能,后来认为这笔资金不够,需要每年数十亿美元投入。开放人工智能意识到实现通用人工智能需要大量计算资源,因此考虑建立一个营利实体。马斯克曾要求合并进入特斯拉或由他全面控制开放人工智能,但遭到拒绝。
🤝 开放人工智能与马斯克的路线分叉
本段继续阐述开放人工智能与马斯克关于建立营利实体的分歧。马斯克曾暂停资助开放人工智能,并建议将其并入特斯拉作为"现金奶牛"。但开放人工智能认为不应该让任何个人完全控制该组织。后来马斯克决定离开开放人工智能,计划在特斯拉内建立通用人工智能的竞争对手。他仍表示支持开放人工智能另谋出路募集资金,但后来又认为几亿美元也是不够的。
📝 马斯克对开放人工智能开源立场的质疑
本段引用了一封未知来源的电子邮件,质疑完全开源人工智能技术对于实现通用人工智能的安全性。该邮件称,如果发生"硬着陆式突破",公开一切反而可能让不道德的人利用强大的硬件资源构建不安全的人工智能系统。伊利亚与马斯克的往来邮件中显示,随着越来越接近构建人工智能,开放人工智能会开始变得不那么开放。马斯克在回复中表示认同这种观点。
🔍 质疑开放人工智能的资金来源和发展道路
本段继续引用一封来自未知人士的电子邮件,对开放人工智能的资金来源和发展方向提出质疑。该邮件认为,开放人工智能目前正在烧钱,其非营利模式无法与谷歌等大型科技公司竞争,继续开放研究反而可能助长谷歌的发展。该邮件建议开放人工智能应并入特斯拉,将其作为"现金奶牛"。马斯克在回复中表示,开放人工智能在不作出重大改变的情况下,与谷歌深度学习系统相比完全失败,需要立即投入数十亿美元才有一线生机。
💭 结论:开放人工智能与马斯克的立场分歧
最后一段是开放人工智能的总结,表示遗憾与一度仰慕的马斯克产生分歧和诉讼。他们认为马斯克建议开源人工智能并非万能良方,反而可能增加风险。开放人工智能坚持要在构建人工智能后让世界分享其成果,但保留核心技术的封闭性。他们拒绝了马斯克要求拥有对开放人工智能的绝对控制权。双方因无法就建立营利实体达成协议而分道扬镳。开放人工智能将继续致力于前进,即使离成功还有遥远的路要走。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡开源人工智能
💡人工通用智能(AGI)
💡计算资源
💡非营利组织
💡控制权
💡垄断
💡资金来源
💡专利
💡算法进步
💡安全性
Highlights
OpenAI承认他们意识到建立AGI需要比最初想象的更多资源,这就是他们后来转向营利性实体的原因之一。
ElonMusk当初承诺如果他们无法筹集到10亿美元,他将自己承担剩余部分。
到2017年,OpenAI团队意识到建立AGI需要大量计算资源,远超他们之前的预期。
OpenAI和ElonMusk当时都认识到需要一个盈利性实体来获取所需资源。
ElonMusk曾要求在新的营利实体中拥有多数股权、董事会控制权并出任CEO。
在这些讨论过程中,ElonMusk曾扣压对OpenAI的资金投入作为施压手段。
当时OpenAI团队拒绝让任何个人对OpenAI拥有绝对控制权。
ElonMusk曾建议OpenAI并入特斯拉,将特斯拉作为OpenAI的"现金牛"。
ElonMusk后来选择离开OpenAI,并计划在特斯拉内部建立AGI竞争对手。
ElonMusk曾警告OpenAI,即使筹集几亿美元也不够建立AGI,需要每年投入数十亿美元。
OpenAI声称ElonMusk理解他们的使命并不意味着要开源AGI。
内部邮件显示,当OpenAI越接近建立AGI时,他们计划开始减少公开程度。
ElonMusk在邮件中对此表示认同。
OpenAI表示,尽管ElonMusk启发他们追求更高目标,但他后来开始了竞争对手并对他们提起诉讼,令人遗憾。
OpenAI认为,他们专注于使命的推进,还有漫长的道路要走。
Transcripts
open AI just responded to Elon musk's
lawsuit and they reveal new information
plus internal emails between Elon Musk
Sam Alman ilot Suk and Greg Brockman and
at the end I want to know if you agree
with open AI or Elon Musk and I'm also
going to give my opinion so let's get
into it look at this the authors of this
letter March 5th Greg Brockman Ilia
suver so even though Ilia is kind of on
his way out he still is an author and
listed as an author on this paper and as
you remember ilas husk is the one who
really started the Mutiny against Sam
Alman a few months ago where Sam Alman
got fired by the board so it's
interesting to see him on this paper so
they start with the mission of open AI
which is fine and it's kind of just
marketing speak at this point ensure AGI
benefits all of humanity which means
both building safe and beneficial AGI
and helping create broadly distributed
benefits and this is really important
they're describing it as not as much
sharing the technology as sharing the
benefits and that's going to be a theme
throughout this entire letter and the
first thing that they're going to talk
about is realizing that AGI would
require far more resources than we'd
initially imagined and what they mean by
that is when you start a nonprofit or a
not for profit you have to raise money
and the people you're raising money from
are not going to get a return they are
essentially just donating money and so
it's a lot harder to raise a lot of
money when there is no return in sight
for any of the donors so let's read a
little bit about what they say Elon said
we should announce an initial 1 billion
funding commitment to open AI in total
the nonprofit has raised less than 45
million from Elon and more than 90
million from other donors so Elon along
with Greg and Sam in the early days
realized very quickly and very early
that they were going to need a lot of
money and that money was going to go
mostly towards compute obviously they
were going to need to pay top engineers
and top research scientists their
salaries and compensations but most of
all they needed compute and that's
likely why they partnered and gave away
49% of the company to Microsoft who had
the Azure data centers and were able to
power all of the compute necessary so
let's keep reading when starting open
aai in late 2015 Greg and Sam had
initially planned to raise $100 million
Elon said in an email and they're going
to show the email at the end of this we
need to go with a much bigger number
than 100 million to avoid sounding
hopeless I think we should say that we
are starting with a billion funding
commitment I will cover whatever anyone
else doesn't provide that is crazy to
think about so if they raise $100
million Elon said he'll cover the rest
$900 million and keep in mind Elon was
rich but he wasn't 2022 Elon Rich where
he is one of the top richest people in
the entire world this is still when
Tesla was struggling with a lot of
things and he already had a lot of money
from his Paypal exit and SpaceX was
going pretty well at this time but Tesla
was definitely far from a sure thing we
spent a lot of time trying to Envision a
plausible path through AGI in early 2017
we came to the realization that building
AGI will require vast quantities of
Compu compute we began calculating how
much compute an AGI might plausibly
require we all understood we were going
to need a lot more capitals to succeed
at our mission billions of dollars per
year which was far more than any of us
especially Elon thought we'd be able to
raise as the nonprofit now looking over
the emails and I'll show them to you in
a minute it sure seems like Elon was the
one pushing to raise a lot more money
and Sam and Greg were reacting to his
thoughts about that not as much Sam and
Greg pushing for it but again that's a
bit of speculation on my end and just
kind of trying to read between the lines
and we continue the next section we and
Elon recognized a for-profit entity
would be necessary to acquire those
resources now it's interesting that they
say that because they don't really show
a lot of proof in this letter nor in the
subsequent emails between them that Elon
was really pushing for a for profit
entity although I'll let you decide and
I'll show you all the evidence so the
commentary here is as we discussed the
for-profit structure in order to further
the mission Elon wanted us to merge with
Tesla or he wanted full control now that
tracks with previous stories that I had
heard about Elon trying to take control
of open AI in fact I made a video about
it and it was kind of a unique one-off
video but it really told the story of
the early days of open Ai and Elon
musk's involvement in his attempt to
take over as CEO so this isn't really
the first time Sam alman's reign at open
AI has been challenged when he was more
recently kicked out of open Ai and then
regained control continuing on Elon left
open AI saying there needed to be a
relevant competitor to Google deep mind
and that he was going to do it himself
he said he'd be supportive of us finding
our own path then in late 2017 we and
Elon decided to take the next step for
the mission so then a little bit more
history in late 2017 we and Elon decided
the next step for the mission was to
create a for-profit entity Elon wanted
majority Equity initial board control
and to be CEO so that does sound like
Elon Musk right I mean he's doing the
same thing at Tesla right now he's
asking for more control of the company
he basically bought Twitter so he could
have full control of that company and he
kind of pressures people into letting
him have full control and to be honest
can you blame him he gets stuff done
look at all he has accomplished and I am
far from an Elon Musk Fanboy but at the
same same time I can't deny everything
that he's contributed to the world so
continuing on in the middle of these
discussions he withheld funding again
pressure tactics from Elon Musk and then
Reed Hoffman who is one of the original
donors for open AI but much more behind
the scenes and also if you're not
familiar with Reed Hoffman he was also a
PayPal co-founder and he co-founded the
company LinkedIn so Reed Hoffman bridged
the Gap to cover salaries and operations
we couldn't agree to terms on a
for-profit with Elon because we felt it
was against the mission for any
individual to have absolute control over
open Ai and I don't know I'm reading
this and they kind of have conflicting
stories Elon said okay everything should
be open source and then open Ai and
really who is behind this Greg Brockman
and Sam Alman are saying no we didn't
want any individual to have full control
over the company so not exactly
conflicting but it's more of a they said
they said he then suggest suggested
instead merging open AI into Tesla in
early February 2018 Elon forwarded us an
email suggesting that open AI should
attach to Tesla as its Cash Cow
commenting that it was exactly right
Tesla is the only path that could even
hope to hold a candle to Google even
then the probability of being a
counterweight to Google is small it just
isn't zero boy have things changed in
the world of AI so a lot to unpack in
this sentence first attached to Tesla as
its Cash Cow meaning open AI was going
to be the cash cow even though at the
time it wasn't making anything it was
just burning through cash so I think
Elon had a pretty strong vision of what
open AI could become and maybe this is
proof that Elon did want a for-profit
entity however he never says it should
be closed sourced he kind of agrees to
it in passing but I'll show you that in
a minute and at this time he says open
AI the only way you're going to be
successful the only way that any AI
company can compete with Google directly
is by attaching itself to Tesla having
those additional resources so very very
interesting to see how the tides have
changed in just a handful of years then
Elon chose to leave open AI saying that
our probability of success was zero and
that he planned to build an AGI
competitor within Tesla so he definitely
is building AI within Tesla but it's not
necessarily the AGI that open AI is
building it is real world AGI which is
you know just as important maybe even
more so when he left in February 2018 he
told our team he was supportive of us
finding our own path to raising billions
of dollars in December 2018 Elon sent us
an email saying even raising several
hundred million won't be enough this
needs billions per year immediately or
forget it now all of this doesn't
necessarily mean he thinks it should be
closed Source he just thinks it should
be really well funded and maybe that's
the same thing if you have a for-profit
entity if you're going to commercialize
Ai and that's the way that you're going
to have access to billions of dollars
maybe that's what he meant but that is
not what he said he just said it needs
to be well funded next we advance our
mission by building widely available
beneficial tools and they continue with
this sentiment throughout the entire
letter which is we're building the tools
we're not going to share the research
but we're going to share the benefits
we're going to open up the tools so you
can use them but we control them so in
this entire section right here they
basically just give examples of how AI
is really helping people and
organizations and even governments
throughout the world I'm not going to
read that because it's less interesting
and it's more just marketing speak and
right here they go on to say Elon
understood the mission did not imply
open sourcing AGI I don't know about
that I don't know and here's the proof
that they have and I want to know what
you think let me know in the comments if
you think this is a definitive yes Elon
agrees AGI does not need to be open
source so as Ilia told Elon and they'll
show the email in a minute as we get
closer to building AGI it will make
sense to start being less open so even
back then even years ago they had this
idea the open and open AI means that
everyone should benefit from its fruits
of AI after it's built but it's totally
okay to not share the science to which
Elon replied yep that's it yep now I'm
going to come back to that because
that's important it's taking a step back
for a moment it's still a single company
controlling artificial general
intelligence they get to decide what
happens with it they get to decide who
uses it what restrictions are placed on
it or not and so the fact that they are
saying hey everybody gets the fruits of
it but ultimately it's still up to them
if everybody gets the fruits roots of AI
all right then they end with we're sad
that it's come to this with someone whom
we've deeply admired this sounds like
Sam Alman wrote this directly because he
has said in numerous interviews that he
has looked up to Elon Musk over the
years and Elon Musk can be kind of a
jerk but he still looks up to him he
admires him and I believe this
wholeheartedly someone who inspired us
to aim higher than told us we would fail
started a competitor and then sued us
when we started making meaningful
progress toward open ai's Mission
without him so a lot to unpack there as
well in my previous video about the
lawsuit I said Elon Musk almost
definitely has ulterior motives here he
almost definitely is looking at open AI
success and is really upset because he
gave them a bunch of money they didn't
pay any taxes on it and then they made
it into a for-profit entity and didn't
give him anything for it and he's right
but also be coming from ulterior motives
so he's both right and wrong at the same
time we are focused on advancing our
mission and have a long way to go okay
so they are asking to dismiss all claims
but let's look at a few emails that they
referenced in this letter so first this
is from all the way back in 2015 Elon
mus to Greg Brockman CC Sam Alman
followup from call so in this email they
are discussing a blog post announcing
open Ai and at the time it was really
just a research lab so blog sounds good
assuming adjustments for neity verse
being YC Centric and if you're not
familiar with YC that's why combinator
the venture capital and accelerator firm
that Sam Alman used to run and he also
went through and took funding from them
when he was starting his own company
looped a long time ago and then he goes
on with I'd favor positioning the blog
to appeal a bit more to the general
public there is a lot of value to having
the public roote for us to succeed
something that Elon Musk does
exceptionally well with his companies it
is the reason why with SpaceX they live
stream all of the launches it's why they
have really splashy launches for all the
new Tesla products coming out uh he
loves getting the public behind him and
then having a longer more detailed
inside baseball version for recruiting
okay then here it is we need to go with
a much bigger number than 100 million to
avoid sounding hopeless relative to what
Google or Facebook are spending so at
the time both of these companies are
worth in the billions if not trillions
and if they only raise 100 million it's
going to seem puny and like they can't
do anything with it I think we should
say that we're starting with a billion
and funding commitment this is real I
will cover whatever anyone else doesn't
provide so that is so cool this is real
and he will make sure it happens so
announce a billion and even if they
don't raise a billion he'll give it to
them very cool so template seems fine
and he goes on to just again say apart
from shifting to a vesting cash bonus as
default which can optionally be turned
into YC or potentially space x stock so
I think that's really interesting and I
don't quite understand it at in the
beginning he says don't make it YC
Centric but then he says which can
optionally be turned into YC or
potentially space x stock so I think
he's talking about the compensation for
Greg and Sam and potentially other early
employees being turned into YC or SpaceX
stock I'm not sure how that makes sense
at all because as I understood it open
AI is a completely independent entity
from both of those companies so that's
really interesting if you know what that
means let me know in the comments and
then the next one Elon Musk to Ilia and
Greg Sam Alman is not on this email so
redacted is exactly right I'm not sure
who they're talking about here we may
wish it otherwise but in my and blank's
opinion Tesla is the only path that
could even hope to hold a candle to
Google even then the probability of
being a counterweight to Google is small
it just isn't zero so I don't know who
this is if I had to guess I'd say it's
probably somebody else at Tesla uh but
I'm really not sure and this is another
email and this is actually deeper in the
email thread so we have from not sure to
Elon Musk and they start by working at
The Cutting Edge of AI is unfortunately
expensive for example and they
completely blank this out so this might
be some Insider information about a
company that tried to do something
couldn't I'm not sure in addition to
deep mine Google also has Google brain
research and Cloud tensorflow CPUs and
they own about a third of all research
in fact they hold their own AI
conferences I also strongly suspect that
compute horsepower will be necessary and
whoever wrote this was 100% right and
possibly even sufficient to reach AGI so
if you have enough compute you will
reach AGI and new Cutting Edge
technological breakthroughs might not
even be necessary this is at 2018 which
is is after the famous Transformers
paper came out the core algorithms we
use today have remained largely
unchanged from the '90s not only that
but any algorithmic advances published
in a paper somewhere can almost
immediately
reimplemented and Incorporated
conversely algorithmic advances alone
are inert without the scale to also make
them scary so what they are saying is
when a company or a research lab comes
out with a new piece of research it can
just be reimplemented and that's
literally exactly what happened with the
Transformers paper Google published it
open AI saw it and made something of it
where Google really didn't but again we
don't know who this email is from but it
is to Elon Musk it seems to me that open
AI today is burning cash and that the
funding model cannot reach the scale to
seriously compete with Google an $800
billion company so they hadn't yet
reached a trillion dollar Mark if you
can't seriously compete but continue to
do research in open you might fact to be
making things worse and helping them out
for free because any advances are fairly
easy for them to copy and immediately
incorporate at scale funny the opposite
actually happened Google did the
research published the attention is all
you need paper which is the Transformers
paper open AI took it and implemented it
in a really awesome way a for-profit
pivot might create a more sustainable
Revenue stream over time and would with
the current team likely bring in a lot
of investment however building out a
product from scratch would steal Focus
from AI research all right so I'm going
to skip a bit and here says the most
promising option I can think of as
mentioned earlier would be for open AI
to attach to Tesla as its Cash Cow so I
don't know who said this I'm very very
interested but we don't know I believe
attachments to other large suspects
Apple Amazon would fail due to
incompatible company DNA using a rocket
analogy Tesla already built the first
stage of the rocket with the whole
supply chain of model 3 and it's on
board computer and a persistent internet
connection so then this person goes on
making the case for joining Tesla Tesla
and then they end with I cannot see
anything else that has the potential to
reach sustainable Google scale Capital
within a decade oh they were so wrong
about that then Elon Musk to Ilia Greg
and Sam my probability assessment of
open AI being relevant to Deep Mind
Google without a dramatic change in
execution and resources is 0% not 1% 0%
complete fail not a chance you're going
to succeed this is in 2018 I wish it
were otherwise even raising several
hundred million won't be enough this
needs billions per year immediately or
forget it this line turned out to be
true they need a ton of cash however
this 0% turned out to be completely
false but they did have a change in
execution they changed to a for-profit
entity but that is not what Elon said
here he is suggesting either he takes
control or they join Tesla which I guess
by default makes them a for-profit
entity I don't know what they were
exactly planning there all right here we
go now we're going to read from this
inside email first so from blank we
don't know who that is from to Elon Musk
happy New Year congratulations on
Landing the new Falcon Dy great uh I've
seen you been doing a lot of interviews
recently extolling the virtues of open
sourcing AI but I presume you realize
that this is not some sort of Panacea
that will somehow magically solve the
safety problem so whoever wrote this
email is probably the same person who
has been trying to convince them to join
Tesla but he says or she says realize
that this is not some sort of Panacea
that will somehow magically solve the
safety problem there are many good
arguments as to why the approach you are
taking is actually very dangerous and in
fact may increase the risk to the world
some of the more obvious points are
articulated in this blog post that I'm
sure you've seen and they reference this
blog post so let's take a look at that
quickly so this is a Blog by Scott
Alexander and I had not actually heard
of this name and looking it up on
rational Wiki we see that he began
writing on less wrong under the name
Evan and then branched out to his own
blog slate star codex so Scott Alexander
is the pen name of less wrong
rationalist blogger and psychiatrist
Scott Alexander cisin after graduating
with a bachelor's degree Magnum Ludi
in philosophy he qualified in medicine
at University College cork National
University of Ireland okay so just a
really smart dude so I'm not going to go
through this entire blog post although
it is quite interesting but the gist of
it is Scott Alexander does not believe
in open- Source AI if you want to see me
do a full video just about this paper
cuz it is interesting to think about the
ethics and the moral outcomes possible
when you think about AGI and open source
AI uh let me know in the comments now
here is open ai's proof that Elon Musk
wanted a for-profit entity here is the
majority of the proof at least so from
Ilia to Elon and Sam and Greg the
article is concerned with a hard takeoff
scenario if a hard takeoff occurs and a
safe AI is harder to build than an
unsafe one then by open sourcing
everything we make it easier for someone
unscrupulous with access to overwhelming
amount of Hardware to build an unsafe AI
which will experience a hard takeoff as
we get closer to building AI it will
make sense to start being less open and
that is what they quoted in the blog
post above the open and open AI means
that everyone should benefit from the
fruits of AI after it's built but it's
totally okay to not share the science
even though sharing everything is
definitely the right strategy and the
short and POS possibly medium term for
recruiting purposes and then Elon Musk
says yep now I'm going to play the
devil's advocate here for a second I
think there's a chance that Elon gets a
million emails and he probably doesn't
spend the right amount of time reading
through every single word in every
single email he gets he may have just
skimmed this email and just said yep I
would not consider his yep being a
definitive agreement with everything in
this email although you know maybe
legally it is I'm not sure I'm not a
lawyer but that is an interesting take
nonetheless and so that's it what do you
think do you think open AI is going to
be able to dismiss all claims do you
think they're right here do you think
they've kind of shown the receipts
necessary to show that Elon is actually
bsing and is maybe just jealous that his
company isn't able to compete currently
with open AI so let me know what you
think in the comments if you like this
video please consider giving a like And
subscribe and I'll see you in the next
one
Browse More Related Video
Ilya Sutskever | The birth of AGI will subvert everything |AI can help humans but also cause trouble
"To have dinner with Elon Musk" Ilya Sutskever
You Won't Believe OpenAI JUST Said About GPT-5! Microsoft Secret AI, Hallucination Solved, GPT2
【人工智能】2027年将会实现AGI | 约翰·舒尔曼最新访谈 | OpenAI联合创始人&首席架构师 | 大模型训练 | RLHF | 技术瓶颈 | 模型蒸馏 | AI监管
Marc Andreessen & Andrew Chen Talk Creative Computers
AGI: solved already?
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)