Jump to content

Talk:OpenAI

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi Óskadddddd, I saw that you changed the logo. The previous image looked better, but I guess you changed it for some legal reason related to copyrights. I would be curious to know if this is necessary. From what I see in Commons, it was considered that the previous image does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, and is thus free to use on Wikipedia. Alenoach (talk) 00:44, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, It's not necessarily a copyright change, from my point of view. The company (seems) to have made this their primary logo, so I thought it was right to change it on Wikipedia. I'll explain my decision:
If you look on the OpenAI website, it seems they have moved on from having the Blossom besides the wordmark (It's either only the blossom or the wordmark). Also in OpenAI's Design Guidelines, this was stated "DON'T use the Blossom as the primary branding". I thought of it mostly as a rebranding and changed the logo here on Wikipedia to better reflect that + I found these sources [1] [2]. However, I'm not against my logo switch being reverted, as I don't have a preference for the logo (the company uses both anyways). Óskadddddd (talk) 12:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's indeed what they explicitly say. So I guess we should use your version. Alenoach (talk) 16:21, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Split

In mid-May 2025, the organization announced that it would split the for-profit and the not-for-profit parts into two separate organizations: Kdammers (talk) 04:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://openai.com/index/evolving-our-structure/?_bhlid=acebb9c4409ddd4e255e8d36efed5f2ed075b08f Kdammers (talk) 04:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a subsection on this, see OpenAI#Proposed_shift_from_nonprofit_control. Basically, they wanted the nonprofit to cede its current control of the for-profit. The plan was officially renounced in May after criticism, although in practice the leadership still wants to transition to a PBC, likely undermining nonprofit control.[1] Alenoach (talk) 13:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Preemption lobbying

I searched for "ai preemption" and found numerous news articles from within the last two weeks on the lobbying efforts to formulate federal regulation in place of state regulation, including this Politico article that briefly covers OpenAI. This Bloomberg Law article from March seems to suggest that OpenAI played an active role in raising this discussion. I'm not sure where this content would fit, or if it's substantial enough to include. WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk) 12:17, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe notable enough for a sentence? I suggest adding this sentence just before the subsection "Stance on China", sourced with the Bloomberg Law article:
In March 2025, OpenAI made a policy proposal for the Trump administration to preempt state laws with federal laws. Alenoach (talk) 19:27, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A related paragraph has been developed in Regulation of artificial intelligence. WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk) 12:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]