Greg is humble, resourceful, and smart. That combination alone is enough to move mountains. However, what Sam's piece is missing is the "Why?". Why would someone who can do anything do YOUR thing and take any crud task it takes to finish the job, especially after they've made their fortune? Greg should give his own "Why?" about OpenAI. From what I know if 100 years from now someone looks back at this fork in the road of History, they would see two scenarios: Either a couple of big players will own the most powerful instrument in the hands of mankind, to use at their (or their highest bidder's) discretion, or mankind will jointly get to ensure the instrument has a safety handle to protect life and all things most important.
For the latter, I'd bet many of the smartest people here would want to do the crud work, even if they're not cofounders. The job of the ideal co-founder is to spread a mission that matters this much to everyone who would be fit to achieve it, inspiring all employees to be as committed. Well, OpenAI powered relentlessly by Greg, has inspired thousands of volunteers and open-source contributors in addition to it's top-notch staff.
“The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads.”
-- Jeffrey Hammerbacher
I'm guilty as charged (at least it's about entertaining & useful ads) - but in my post-exit career I'd also be humbled to work on something with this magnitude and relevancy.
In the middle of the tech bubble it's easy to forget how the rest of the world will deal with this bubble with increasing automation, inequality and climate change. It's great to see some people actually tackling the really important topics even if they could get a 6-7 digit paycheck at top Tech companies.
> Either a couple of big players will own the most powerful instrument in the hands of mankind, to use at their (or their highest bidder's) discretion, or mankind will jointly get to ensure the instrument has a safety handle to protect life and all things most important.
Missing, of course, the strongest possibility, which is that said instrument, either covertly or overtly, is the big player which is calling the shots.
They do have open source projects, but their mission is not to necessarily be an open source company. They want to equalize the footing in AI for everyone, and this might require some degree of secrecy so that commercial AI companies do not get an edge. At least, that is my perception, feel free to correct me.
I think its more about making the same research available to everyone, or other things that are relatively free to distribute (like code, even though, as hinted, it does not mean that everything will be open-sourced as its written).
Although, you do make a good point. If only the most powerful companies can afford meaningful machine time, how democratized can AI be?
For the latter, I'd bet many of the smartest people here would want to do the crud work, even if they're not cofounders. The job of the ideal co-founder is to spread a mission that matters this much to everyone who would be fit to achieve it, inspiring all employees to be as committed. Well, OpenAI powered relentlessly by Greg, has inspired thousands of volunteers and open-source contributors in addition to it's top-notch staff.