On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 1:00 PM Mikael Djurfeldt <mik...@djurfeldt.com>
wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 11:53 AM James Crake-Merani <ja...@jamescm.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 18/03/2023 08:29, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
>>
>> > My take is that such potentially society-shattering technologies
>> > don't belong in the hands of corporations which have no choice
>> > but to maximize their return on investment. But perhaps that's me.
>>
>> Yes, I find it concerning that this technology is owned by OpenAI which
>> is a for profit company. Because, as you say, for profit companies are
>> not necessarily interested in the societal benefits that new technology
>> brings along but rather the profits that can be made off this technology.
>>
>
> One problem with trying to preserve freedom wrt AI is that training on
> large data requires a lot of computational resources. It would be nice if
> there were some kind of non-profit organization ("FreeAI"?) where people
> who want free AI pool their resources. I guess in this case it can't be
> financed the same way as Wikipedia but there would have to be a
> subscription fee.
>
The original intention of OpenAI was somewhat in that direction, right?
Then came Microsoft...
"Free" is not the same thing as "open" and in some cases "open" is "closed".
