Hacker News Reader

Comment by dieselgate | Hacker News Reader

I'm not very familiar with this space but would have thought "OpenAI" would be at least somewhat open-source. Is this just naming and not relevant to the product at all?

View on HN

> Is this just naming and not relevant to the product at all?

They took funding as an open source non profit. Once they got the money they turned into a closed sourced for-profit censorship machine.

Yeah, but to be fair GPT 2 is open source and Whisper (a high-quality speech recognition and multilingual translation model) is also open source. A few years ago I needed a good model for transcription for a project and I couldn’t find anything decent. They really have contributed to the open source community.

If they keep releasing older models and keep their cutting-edge technology for profit I’m fine with it.

Fair enough.

Initially they released papers and open-sourced the model and training set.

Then the VC money came in and they became ClosedAI and a for-profit and releases papers without the model. No better than what DeepMind already does.

The name ‘OpenAI’ now has no meaning. It is a deception and is essentially a Microsoft AI division.

OpenAI stopped being a non-profit and hasn't published anything on Chatgpt yet

They have, although not datasets:

https://openai.com/blog/deep-reinforcement-learning-from-hum...

https://openai.com/blog/fine-tuning-gpt-2/

https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/

People like Anthropic have been able to reproduce it.

Brand names convey a brand, not a meaning. They just expect you to give them the good associations, without the commitment to actually honor them. Similarly to "People's Republic of", or in every case of foreign branding, like Haagen-Dazs.

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

Reply on news.ycombinator.com