At first I thought of it as Open(Web|Source|File Format|StreetMap|etc), now I group it with OpenTable.
Also at first this objection really resonated with me. I think the meaning of OpenAI has spread pretty well now, and that it's getting to the point where raising this objection is tiresome.
There is an important point to be made about how it got popularized as being open and then they went and closed it while keeping the momentum, but that should be made instead of just saying, "wait, it's called OpenAI but isn't open?!?!"
I still think publicly expressing how we feel about their “openness” is the right thing to do. And I’m sure there are people inside OpenAI who feel the same way.
To be fair, that usually implies that you're made tired by the recipient's statement. Like if your child (hypothetical) was misbehaving and you told him "I'm getting tired of your disobedience" that child should expect that you mean you want them to stop being disobedient.
That’s always been bad taste as a joke. Like the French boomers who transform “Facebook” into “Face de bouc” thinking it’s funny. It’s really tiresome for people familiar with the subject, but it feels novel to them because they are not well-connected with other people.
Cynical monikers applied to corporations and/or brand names are not meant to be funny, at all. They are often useful warning signs, meant to demonstrate corporate deviousness over time.
Open could be used to describe the public interface to the closed model. As compared to Google's pre-chatgpt models which where inaccessible to the public.
Yeah, the whole 'open' part of this was them aligning themselves philosophically with open-source. But of course they throw that away when the money comes talking...
Meanwhile, competitors are choking in papers, but fail to release anything I can get my hands on (that’s worth a damn).
I can actually appreciate “open” as “open to access” or “open to actually having a product iso posturing about being so far ahead but never releasing anything worthwhile” (looking at Google).
But if they release model weights to their algorithmic raster image generator and don't succeed in their lobbying efforts to ban their competitors, it will result in the AI apocalypse. Think of the children!
I am one of the more powerful open source fanatics out there, and yet this constant refrain, over and over, lamenting that the name of the company is inaccurate, is very tiresome. I think we know here. This does not add anything to the discussion IMO. Observing that no weights, code, or paper were released are useful, but the line about “OpenAI is not really open” is IMO tired and unproductive. They aren’t going to change it. It’s just sour grapes at this point.
Are you suggesting that if we complain hard enough about the name on Hacker News that… OpenAI is going to change their name? Because it is my position that this will never succeed, and all we’re doing is adding noise to the discussion here.
I don't want them to change their name, I want them to open-source their models.
And its not about HN, it is about the larger community grumbling. Not that it will do anything but if they're going to annoy us with their disingenuous naming then we can annoy them by calling them out for it. There are a million other names of blithe corpo-jibberish they could use, but they didn't.
And it is oh-so-convenient how discussion that you don't like is "noise". Us smarties are fantastic at rationlizing arent we? Yes let's just limit the conversation to breathless panty-creaming only. I'm sure the CEO would really like that!
Shut up and accept what? A company being closed source / for profit? Are we rioting against capitalism or something? Should I get my pitchforks? Just to be sure, we'll include literally all major tech companies, or is only OpenAI the target?
I agree - however is it really productive to the discussion if multiple people are commenting the exact same thing every single time? Upvoting one comment that shares this sentiment is enough, in my opinion...otherwise any valid criticisms are overshadowed by this outrage over the name.
Sure, but when you say something people resonate with it gets upvoted until it's the top comment relatively consistently. So while I have no issue with you objecting to this, most people clearly still agree with it. For what it's worth, I am very much in the "don't be a deceptive asshole" camp.
The other aspect you're missing is once you stop criticizing it, you are passively normalizing it. And that's horseshit. Call out the fuckers that do bad shit more often because they deserve it. I am not saying you are a shill, but you are doing exactly what the company wants - normalizing their shitty behavior and defending them against criticism for it.
We get it. OpenAI is a for profit company now. The "Open" in name doesn't reflect their vision anymore. Can we stop it already? Or is this some kind of rant against for profit / closed source in general?
> Mr. Smith thought the word “federal” suggested an interest in nationwide economic activity, and hoped the name would resonate with the Federal Reserve Bank, a potential customer.
I think I remember there being an organizational structure where the outer organization was a non-profit and they separated out what is now OpenAI into a for-profit subsidiary with a profit cap of 100x investment.
At this point, I won't hesitate a single bit of doubt that this company literally stole stable diffusion and built on top of it. Like how will we ever know? If they were so good they could have released before SDXL. But they waited.
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Democratic Republic of the Congo. Anyone who puts the word Democratic in their name is likely to be less democratic than others
Are you willing to fund their org and all their salaries? That's what it would take them to be open in a capitalistic society, realistically.
Don't get me wrong, I love open-source, open-weights research, but the elephant in the room is that people aren't willing to do that on dirt-poor postdoc salaries anymore, for good reasons, especially when greedy landlords are now charging upwards of $4000/month just to have a reasonable living space, and the government takes close to 50% of your salary.
Not only is there no nutritional information or recipe released, there's not even an ingredients list. Nothing is revealed about this fruit. 'Apple,' ladies and gentlemen. Heck, the only Apples you'll find at an Apple Store are running on iOS, not growing on trees!
