I read that you joined Open AI and I think it is good project now, but the idea of "openness of AI" was fairly criticised by Bostrom in his new article. But it seems that the organisation named "OpenAI" will do much more than promote openness. There is a little confusion between the name of organisation and the idea of letting everybody to run their own AI code.
I joked that the same way we could create Open Nuke project which will deliver reactors to every household which would probably result in in very balanced world where every household could annihilate any other household, and so everybody is very polite and crime is almost extinct.
I read that you joined Open AI
I have no affiliations with Open AI. In this case I'm driven by "Don't judge a book by it's cover"-motivations. Especially in high stakes situations.
But it seems that the organisation named "OpenAI" will do much more than promote openness. There is a little confusion between the name of organisation and the idea of letting everybody to run their own AI code.
I think taking the name of an organisation as ultimate authority of what the organisation is about is a bit near-sighted.
Making good strategic decisions is complicated. It requires looking at where a move is likely to lead in the future.
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.
Notes for future OT posters:
1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.
2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one. (Immediately before; refresh the list-of-threads page before posting.)
3. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.
4. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.