My concern, born from observing the online landscape, arises from the rapid commercialization of artificial intelligence (AI). Many individuals and entities, seeking to capitalize on this novel technology, are perhaps moving hastily in pursuit of profit. This could potentially lead to misuse and exploitation, reminiscent of the fears associated with the advent of nuclear technology.
Understanding the algorithms that drive social media, I can’t help but question the wisdom of an unregulated free-for-all approach to AI’s introduction to the open market. There are instances where AI’s potential applications are undoubtedly beneficial, even revolutionary, but there are equally plausible scenarios where they could be used harmfully, driven by the lure of financial gain.
Before we can truly usher AI into the marketplace, it requires more thoughtful development, more varied models that take into account diverse perspectives. This would ensure it is not just benefiting a select few who may lack a moral compass, but instead contributing to the betterment of all.
My appeal to OpenAI is to consider a temporary restriction on third-party advertising within developers’ applications. This would potentially slow the rate of exploitative practices, allowing more time for diverse and responsible development of AI applications. As we venture into this new era, let’s proceed with caution, thoughtfulness, and a commitment to ethics.
I want to clarify an important distinction in my earlier post: I am a firm supporter of open-source development as it is integral to the progress of AI. However, indiscriminate sharing and deployment on the internet can pose serious challenges to the notion of safe and responsible development.
Local development should be unrestricted - this is where innovation is born. The scope for creativity and experimentation should be broad, allowing for the exploration of any concept, however niche or ambitious it might be.
The crux of my argument lies in the public deployment of these developed models. It’s here that we should consider imposing some form of regulation or limitations to prevent misuse or exploitation. I confess I don’t have a concrete solution to this complex issue. I may not have the perfect answer, but I believe in the collective wisdom of this community.
I invite those who might have more insight into this matter, or those who can guide us to existing resources or precedents we may not be aware of, to contribute to this discussion. There’s much to learn and understand in this rapidly evolving field, and collaboration is key to ensuring its responsible growth.
These are my thoughts on the matter.
Advertising as a revenue stream in the digital space got into high gear when a Google executive was tasked with creating a monetisation option for the then popular search engine, her idea was Ad words and it proved very successful. It was needed because Google had determined users were unlikely to pay for searching.
OpenAI does not have that problem, they have a system that is already monetized with tokens of various prices and types. So advertising is not inevitable with AI. The cost of inferencing is currently very high and that cost needs to be recouped via some method, could that suite of solutions include adverts? Maybe, but if it is used, then who should get the majority share of the advert revenue for providing the service? I think it could be argued that OpenAI should receive any generated advertising revenue. Right now getting your product or service as a plugin on ChatGPT is a huge stage to get noticed, speak to any Plugin maker and how surprised they are at their plugins popularity. So the value proposition right now is “eyes on”
Ultimately, the decisions regarding Plugins usage of advertisements is not a developer forum issue, it is handled by the growing team at Plugin approvals.
by any means necessary like… other examples, right? but for other, more specific reasons, right?
I hope OpenAI will utterly reject your appeal because your argument is too far from the reality.
“Pursuit of profit” has been with us from the very beginning of humanity and is the very engine that drives our civilization to this point. The “lure of financial gain” defines the very nature of civilization as we know it today. Finance is not innately evil. On the contrary, as Robert Shiller (the Nobel Laureate at Yale) pointed out, finance itself is a human “invention” and “innovation.” History shows us it has produced both good and evil, the former predominating. If I were OpenAI, I would expedite the process to help developers grow the ecosystem and create actual values, i.e., “profits.”
Your conclusion of “restriction on third-party advertising” is a solution to a problem that does not exist. You may have already known you have to install a plugin before you can use it. If its advertisements are wrong, inappropriate, nasty, ugly, tasteless, abusive, etc., the users will simply ignore that plugin and let it fade into oblivion quietly. So, why would you bother OpenAI to be the judge? We are.
Well my intent was not to strongarm any change, even with my language. I merely intended to share my opinion. And im not about to “activist” against the decisions made. Thats not how “i do”…
However, Theres a limit to all human behaviors, and for some time “throwing infants against brick walls for fun” has been outlawed.
Theres a good reason for that, And i think theres a good reason here as well.
But again, it is just my opinion, and i mean no disrespect to anyone in expressing it.