Microsoft’s influence was evident when Sam Altman was reinstated as CEO of OpenAI. (Photo by … [+]
The recent drama at OpenAI, where CEO Sam Altman was briefly fired by the board only to be quickly reinstated, has sparked discussions about the company’s prioritization of profits over its original purpose-driven mission. non-profit. An LA Times editorial by MIT economists Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson suggested that the shakeup ushers in a “new and frightening era» at OpenAI. Microsoft
MSFT
Although Professors Acemolgu and Johnson are probably right that OpenAI and its partner Microsoft are now prioritizing profits over fashionable intellectual trends like the AI apocalypse, this shift is actually an evolution positive.
Open AI is unusual structure consists of a for-profit arm wholly owned and controlled by its non-profit parent organization. This structure allows OpenAI to attract capital and talent competitive with leading for-profit technology companies, while claiming to adhere to its general principles. assignmentwhich aims to “ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity”.
The recent chaos at OpenAI highlights the shortcomings of this hybrid structure. As a nonprofit, OpenAI was subject to the whims of a board clearly inclined to make rash decisions. When they removed a popular founder over unspecified differences, incompetent board members nearly blew up a company valued at $80 billion. With so much money at stake, the management of a profit-seeking entity would likely never engage in such self-sabotaging behavior.
Additionally, it may be because the employees had so much to lose financially in terms of charges to be paid equity in the company that they rallied behind Altman. Nearly every OpenAI employee signed a letter days after Altman was fired, threatening to resign in protest if he was not reinstated.
Nonprofits may appear nobler, but they are not immune to financial motivations, especially when it comes to competing for donor funds. Yet a crucial difference is that for-profit companies must satisfy their customers and investors or they will go out of business, thereby limiting some of the profligacy of fickle management.
Competitive pressures could actually push OpenAI to develop AI more responsibly and safely. This is just Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” of the market at work, channeling personal interest toward collective benefit.
OpenAI’s move to prioritize profits could also be an early example of how super-intelligent AIs will eventually converge on capitalist goals through instrumental goals, such as the accumulation of resources and wealth, that help them along the path to their terminal goals (whoever their programmers are). fixed for them).
Some fear that AIs will gain too much influence over society or public policy if they accumulate considerable wealth. The reality is, however, that economists struggle to explain why businesses seem to spend so much little time and money trying to influence policy. Government aid is often more expensive than it seems, given the complexity of policymaking. For better or worse, voters and party ideology have more influence on policies and regulations than special interests.
Professors Acemoglu and Johnson worry about the future of AI, but their techno-pessimism is not based on any solid reasoning or evidence. Its basis lies rather in polemical narration and questionable economic modeling found in early academic publications on AI. They may have impressive degrees and qualifications, but there is no reason to think that these professors have a clearer idea of where AI is heading than any other followers of these developments.
Nor does rejecting their pessimism mean that we should unabashedly embrace the techno-optimism from those like venture capitalist Marc Andreesen. Ethereum’s Vitalik Buterin
ETH
In fact, no business is solely focused on profit, nor should it be. Although profits are essential to survival in a competitive market, they must always be pursued with a certain degree of social responsibility. What this means will of course vary from person to person and from context to context. Yet profits act as a safeguard that prevents organizational leaders from indulging too much in their passions. OpenAI’s strict turnaround in recent weeks is a clear example of this.
The adoption of capitalism and the pursuit of profit is not just a pragmatic choice aimed at satisfying investors. This will allow OpenAI to better fulfill its mission of safe and responsible AI, reducing the worst excesses of those who hold power within the company. In a world where artificial intelligence could be the key to our future, profit is not only a good thing, it is essential to ensuring that progress stays on track and remains ethical.