Elon Musk is not wrong with OpenAI. It started out as one thing and then became another, although that's not necessarily a bad thing.
The enfant terrible of the tech and social media world filed a lawsuit (PDF) late Thursday against OpenAI and its co-founders Sam Altman and Gregory Brockman, alleging that by launching a for-profit branch, OpenAI violated the terms of its original founding agreement, which promised that OpenAI would work to ensure that AI and even general AI were developed for the betterment of humanity.
Musk, Altman and Brockman launched OpenAI in 2015 with that agreement in place, but after investing millions ($44 million by Musk's count) into the nonprofit and multiple disagreements over the company's direction, Musk and OpenAI eventually parted ways. they separated.
Meanwhile, OpenAI launched a profit arm, which could do a better job funding its research than collecting donations, and partnered with Microsoft, which gave OpenAI a huge multimillion-dollar investment and gained exclusive access to some of the company's work. product. That gave Microsoft a leg up in the AI race and helped it launch Copilot (formerly Bing Chat).
In the lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages and OpenAI's return to its nonprofit, open-source roots, Musk claims that OpenAI “has been transformed into a de facto closed-source subsidiary of the largest technology company in the world.” world: Microsoft”.
He points to the development of GPT-4, which Musk claims can outperform humans, and how its trajectory has not matched that of GPT-3.5. Unlike previous OpenAI GPT models, GPT-4 is not yet open source. Musk claims, however, that Microsoft has access to that internal design.
Very powerful
And then there's the generative AI model so powerful it may have led to Sam Altman's temporary dismissal as CEO (before his return four days later). Nicknamed Q* (pronounced Q Star), Q* could be the dangerously powerful superintelligence that had OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever so worried that he sided with the board of directors when they decided to remove Altman.
Most of that board is gone and Altman is once again firmly in control. Musk's lawsuit argues that this is a recipe for disaster, alleging that the new board lacks “substantial experience in AI and, based on information and belief, are not well equipped by design to make an independent determination about whether OpenAI has reached AGI and when…”
A key element of the lawsuit is Musk's belief that any AGI (superintelligence) development is outside the scope of the Microsoft agreement and, if OpenAI gives the tech giant access to that technology, it is breaking the rules.
The overall goal of the lawsuit here is to “force OpenAI to adhere to the Founding Agreement and return to its mission of developing AGI for the benefit of humanity, not to personally benefit individual Defendants and the world's largest technology company” .
To be fair, Musk is not asking for his millions back, although it is noted that the level of compensation is well above the “Court's jurisdictional minimum of $35,000.” However, the way I see it, Musk is just kicking his butt, arguing that OpenAI no longer plays fair.
You see, it's not that Musk never uses AI for commercial or profit purposes. His ridiculous chatbot Grok, the first product from his newly formed artificial intelligence company xAI, charges for its use or, more accurately, asks you to pay a subscription fee life.
Musk's Tesla uses Dojo, a powerful and expensive supercomputer, to develop computer vision video processing. Dojo AI is used to develop autonomous driving systems for Teska's equally expensive electric vehicles.
There is some merit to Musk and others' concerns about the inherent danger of AI going crazy, but even he has admitted that the world is caught in an AI arms race.
You have to be in it to win it.
In 2017, when the president of Russia Vladimir Putin warned: “Putin says the nation that leads in AI 'will be the ruler of the world' Musk tweeted: “China, Russia and soon all countries will have strong computing. Competition for AI superiority at the national level is the most likely cause of World War III, in my opinion.”
It was a warning about the fight for AI dominance, but also a sign that the war had already begun. No country can afford to be left behind, and whether we like it or not, OpenAI can give us the best chance of staying ahead.
Musk is right, though, OpenAI is trying to do both: retain the altruistic sheen of a nonprofit with one hand while collecting receipts with the other.
Perhaps it would make more sense for OpenAI to abandon the gimmick and simply become what it primarily is: a for-profit company.
What we are quickly learning is that the companies that develop AI cannot be the ones that also control it.
Imperfect nonprofits like the Partnership for AI (which, yes, counts Facebook, Amazon, Google, and IBM among its founders) are at least not trying to build the next generative platform. Instead, they focus on best practices and guidance.
In the end, Elon Musk is neither a defender of AI rights nor a protector of the realm. He is a frustrated ex-partner who wonders why his own efforts don't have as much impact and whether he can use the courts to make himself feel better while he undermines his ex-girlfriend.
you might also like
