Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Your example is extreme, of course kenyan labelers contribute a minuscule fraction of value and they would be easily replaced by other workers if needed. Replacing the engineers is harder.

Labelling data is easier (and therefore cheaper) than doing machine learning.

OpenAI often argues for socialism-light, aka today's social democracies that leech on the middle class and favor politicians and the rich elite class.

It doesn't argue for full blown socialism with equal pay for any job. I think the historical proof is just too large to argue otherwise, which is why socialist politicians are going for the UBI alternative.

Same crap, but hey it will totally work this time.



This is the same axomatic ideology that GPT responded with. Miniscule fraction of what value? What do you think would happen to openai's valuation if their models would accidently advocate for pedophilia or building bombs? I mean this very topic we comment on just vaporized the market value of openai to single digit percentages. Openai raised nearly $18B, while DeepSeek-R1 cost $6M, works just as fine and is open. It has just been empirically proven that the market value of the developers working on GPT is actually dramatically lower than the payment they got.


> It has just been empirically proven that the market value of the developers working on GPT is actually dramatically lower than the payment they got.

Completely and absolutely false, there is no "empirical proof" of this. And this is just post-hoc reasoning, it is extremely easy to just look down the past after everything is already settled. It was OpenAI developers that researched that technology and implemented it first, DeepSeek was made AFTER it, it was already benefiting from the GPT technology in the first place (they even probably used it as a material to make more training data, as almost all current models used).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: