Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The reality is always a dynamic tension between law, regulation, precedent, and enforceability.

It is possible to strangle OpenAI without strangling AI: pmarca is anti-OpenAI in print, but you can bet your butt he hopes to invest in whatever replaces it, and he’s got access to information that like, 10 people do.

A useful example would be the Napster Wars: the music industry had been rent seeking (taking the fucking piss really) for decades and technology destroyed the free ride one way or another. The public (led by the technical/hacker/maker public) quickly showed that short of disconnecting the internet, we were going to listen to the 2 good songs without buying the 8 shitty ones. The technical public doesn’t flex its muscles in a unified way very often, but when it does, it dictates what is and isn’t on the menu.

The public wants AI, badly. They want it aligned by them within the constraints of the law (which is what “aligned” should mean to begin with).

The public is getting what it wants on this: you can bet the rent. Whether or not OpenAI gets on board or gets run the fuck over is up to them.

“You in the market for a Tower Records franchise Eduardo?”




a16z are investors in openai





Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: