At that time, many people outside the AI research insulating knew about the open. But as a reporter’s position MIT Technology Review Covering the always growing limits of artificial intelligence, I was closely following its movements.
Until this year, Openi had been a stepfather in AI research. It was an unprecedented basis that the AGI could be achieved within a decade, when most non -Openai experts suspected that it could be achieved at all. In most fields, it was a pornographic amount of financial support despite the slightest direction and it spent a lot of money on marketing that other researchers are often eliminated as extraordinary research. It was also a purpose of jealousy for some people. An unpredictable, he said he had no intention of chasing his commercial deployment. It was a rare intellectual playground without which strings are attached, a haven for passionate ideas.
But in six months until my visit, the rapid changes in Openi indicated a major change in its path. The first was a confused decision to stop the GPT -2 and to boast about it. Then the announcement that Sam Ultman, who mysteriously sent his influential flag to the YC, will move forward with the formation of his new “CAP – Profit” structure as the CEO of Openi. I had already made my arrangements to visit the office when he then disclosed his contract with Microsoft, which preferred tech giant to commercialize Open technologies, and Microsoft’s cloud – camping platform, using it specially closed.
Each new announcement gained fresh controversy, intense speculation and growing attention, which began to move beyond the limits of the tech industry. Since I and my colleagues covered the company’s development, it was difficult to understand the full weight of what was happening. What was clear was that the openness of the open AI research is starting to put meaningful pressure and the way policy makers are learning to understand this technology. The lab’s decision to convert itself into a profitable business will influence its influence in the industry and the government.
At the end of the night, with my editor’s insistence, I took an email to Open Policy Director Jack Clark, with whom I had spoken earlier: I would stay in the city for two weeks, and it felt as if it had the right moment in the history of Openi. Can I give them an interest in a profile? Clark conveyed me to the head of communication, who returned with a response. The Open was really ready to reproduce himself in front of the public. I will have three days to interview the leadership and embed down the company.
Me and the chief scientist of the Brookman Company left in the glass meeting with Elias Soccer. Sitting side by side at a long conference table, each of them played their role. Brookman, coder and doing, bent forward, a little on the edge, is ready to make a good impression. Researchers and philosophers, Soskur, went comfortably and comfortably in their chair.
I opened my laptop and scored through my questions. Openi’s mission is to ensure beneficial AGI, I started. Why spend billions of dollars on this issue and nothing else?
Brookman shook his head loudly. He was accustomed to defending the post of Open. He said, “Because we care about AGI and we think it is important to build it because we think it can help solve complex problems that are beyond the reach of human beings.”