OpenAI’s “Own Goal”
We recorded 7 claims from this post. 3 were checked against evidence. 4 can’t be checked. 4 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (7)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“Elon Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI may fail, or even get dismissed.”
Our reading: Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI may fail or even be dismissed.
No horizon
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Observation
“Almost nothing is known about the precise internal mechanisms of GPT-4 or what it has trained on.”
Our reading: Almost nothing is known about the precise internal mechanisms of GPT-4 or what it has been trained on.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: Official nondisclosure does not prove that outsiders knew nothing.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Observation
“They knew they were misleading people and failed to take an opportunity to correct.”
Our reading: OpenAI knew it was misleading people into believing it meant open-sourced AI and failed to take an opportunity, at a May 2016 meeting, to correct that belief.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The supplied evidence consists of one reported account; no independent recording, transcript, or meeting minutes are supplied.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“The two facts that have come out make it look like they never really intended to follow their own charter.”
Our reading: The revealed facts suggest OpenAI never really intended to follow its charter.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Rhetoric
“Leopards rarely change their spots.”
Our reading: Marcus applies the proverb 'leopards rarely change their spots' to OpenAI, expressing distrust of its character.
No horizon
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Observation
“And the apparent copyright infringements that Reid Southen and I discussed in early January continue apace two months later, as I found in a quick experiment this morning:”
Our reading: The apparent copyright infringements that Marcus and Reid Southen discussed in early January 2024 were continuing apace two months later, based on a quick experiment Marcus ran on the morning of the post.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The result depends on reading 'apace' as continued ready production rather than a quantitative rate claim.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“But casting a blind eye to covert racism, apparent copyright infringement, and violent and degrading outputs is not.”
Our reading: OpenAI should not turn a blind eye to covert racism, apparent copyright infringement, and violent or degrading outputs.
No horizon
Held from this post (4)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: OpenAI has almost entirely abandoned open source and is among the least open AI companies.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: The released email shows OpenAI knew for years it did not intend to be as open as its name and statements suggested.