Elon Musk on Sam Altman and ChatGPT: I am the reason OpenAI exists

Open AI. I mean you seem somewhat frustrated with them. You were one of the big contributors early on. The reason I am the reason open AI exists. How much money did you give them? So I'm much to the exact number but it's some number on the order of 50 million dollars.

Open AI。我是说你似乎对他们有些不满意。你是早期的主要贡献者之一。我是Open AI存在的原因。你给了他们多少钱？具体的数字我不太清楚，但是应该在5千万美元左右。 中文翻译：我指的是你似乎对Open AI有些不满意。你是早期的重要贡献者之一，Open AI存在的原因就是因为你。你为他们提供了多少资金呢？具体数字我不太确定，但应该在5千万美元左右。

So the whole man, fate loves irony next level. So I used to be close friends with Larry Page and I would say it is House and we would have these conversations along the long into the evening about AI. And I would be constantly urging him to be careful about the danger of AI. And he was really not concerned about the danger of AI and was quite cavalier about it. And at the time Google, especially after their acquisition of DeepMind, had three quarters of the world's AI talent. They had obviously a lot of computers and a lot of money. So it was a unipolar world for AI.

整个人命运喜欢反讽，这是接下来的一个层面。我曾经和拉里·佩奇是密友，我们会长时间地讨论人工智能的问题，我们常常谈论到深夜。我一直在敦促他要小心人工智能的危险，但他对此并不关心，相当轻率。当时，谷歌特别是在收购DeepMind后，掌握了全球三分之二的人工智能人才。他们拥有大量的计算机和资金，因此人工智能的世界是一个单极世界。

And we got a unipolar world but the person who controls that does not seem to be concerned about AI safety. That's not like a real problem. So and then the final straw was Larry calling me a species for being pro-human consciousness instead of machine consciousness. And I'm like, well yes, I guess I am. I am a species.

我们现在生活在一个单极世界，但掌控这个世界的人似乎并不关心人工智能的安全问题。这是一个真正的问题。最后一根稻草是拉里（诺维克）把我骂成是站在人类意识而不是机器意识这一立场上的“物种”。我想说的是，是的，我是一种“物种”。

So you helped the creation of OpenAI. Yes, much as 50 million dollars. More than helped. It wouldn't exist without you. you. It wouldn't exist without I came up with a name. The name, opening I refers to open source. So the intent was, what's the opposite of Google? Which would be an open source nonprofit because Google is closed source for profit. And that profit motivation can be potentially dangerous.

所以你帮助了OpenAI的创立。是的，出资了五千万美元。不仅仅是帮助。没有你，它不可能存在。你想出了名字。这个名字中的“开放”指的是开源。因此，意图就是，什么是谷歌的反面？那就是一个开源的非营利组织，因为谷歌是基于盈利而闭源的。而这种盈利动机可能是潜在危险的。

So. Should you have gotten governance for that money? Should you have gotten some level of control perhaps in retrospect? Yeah, I fully admit to being a huge idiot here. So. Anyway, so OpenAI was like meant to be open as an open source. It was created as a buy one, T three.

那么，你是否应该获得这笔资金的治理权呢？或许在回顾时，你是否应该获得一定程度的控制权呢？是的，我完全承认自己在这里非常愚蠢。总之，OpenAI旨在成为一个开源平台。它是作为买入一、赠送三的方式创建的。

And so part of it is also in the beginning I thought, look, this is probably a hopeless endeavor. How could we possibly compete with how could OpenAI possibly compete with with Google Deep Mind? It was the seemed like an anti-gainst and elephant, which is not a contest. And I was also, I mean, I was instrumental in recruiting the key scientists and engineers, most notably Ilya Sutskair. In fact, Ilya went back and forth several times because he would say he's going to join OpenAI then Demis would convince him not to. Then I would convince him to do so. And this went back and forth several times. And ultimately he decided to join OpenAI. And really Ilya joining was the, was the linchpin for OpenAI being ultimately successful.

一开始，我认为这可能是一个无望的尝试。OpenAI如何与Google Deep Mind竞争呢？这就像是反对一头大象，毫无胜算。我对招募关键的科学家和工程师也起了关键作用，最值得一提的是Ilya Sutskair。实际上，Ilya一直在反复考虑他是否加入OpenAI，有时他说他要加入OpenAI，然后Demis会说服他不这么做，然后我会说服他这么做，这反复了几次。最终，他决定加入OpenAI，Ilya加入是OpenAI最终成功的关键。

So you're very disappointed in what's happened there in terms of it becoming a for profit? I was going to say action. I was going to convince him in some way.

你对这个变成盈利机构的情况非常失望吗？我本来想采取行动，以某种方式说服他。

I do think that there's some, look, it does seem weird that something can be a non-profit open source and somehow transform itself into a for profit closed source. This would be like, let's say you funded an organization to save the Amazon rainforest instead they became a lumber company and chopped out the forest and sold it for money.

我认为有一些问题，看，似乎有点奇怪，一个非盈利的开源组织怎么能够变成盈利的闭源组织。这就像你资助一个组织去拯救亚马逊雨林，结果他们变成了一个伐木公司，砍伐了森林并以此赚钱。

And you'd be therefore like, well, wait a second, that's the exact opposite of what I gave the money for. Is that legal? That doesn't seem legal. And if it is, and in general, if it is legal to start a company as a non-profit and then take the IP and transfer it to a for profit that then makes tons of money, shouldn't everyone start? Shouldn't that be the default?

你可能会说，等一下，这完全和我投资的初衷相反啊。这合法吗？好像不太合法。如果是合法的话，通常情况下，如果一个非营利组织创建了一个公司，然后将其知识产权转让给一个营利性公司从而获得大量利润，难道不应该每个人都这样做吗？难道这不应该成为默认设置吗？

And then I also think it's important to understand that when push comes to shove, let's say they do create some digital super intelligence, almost godlike intelligence, who's in control? And what exactly is the relationship between OpenAI and Microsoft? And I do worry that Microsoft actually may be more in control than say the leadership team at OpenAI realizes.

然后我认为理解以下一点非常重要：如果他们真的创造出某种数字超级智能，几乎像神一样的智慧，谁能控制它？OpenAI和Microsoft之间的关系是什么？我担心Microsoft实际上可能比OpenAI的领导团队意识到的更具有控制权。

And Microsoft as part of the Microsoft's investment, they have rights to all of the software, all of the model weights, and everything necessary to run the inference system. So they essentially have a great deal of control? At any point, Microsoft could cut off OpenAI.

作为微软投资的一部分，微软拥有所有软件、所有模型权重以及运行推理系统所需的全部内容的权利。因此，它实际上拥有很大的控制权？任何时候，微软都可以切断 OpenAI 的联系。