[HN Gopher] OpenAI for Countries
___________________________________________________________________
OpenAI for Countries
Author : camlinke
Score : 69 points
Date : 2025-05-07 21:05 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (openai.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (openai.com)
| simonjgreen wrote:
| I'm trying to remember the last time I saw an advertisement or
| product targeting entire nations...
| aduffy wrote:
| Every defense company. c.f. Anduril's "arsenal of democracy"
| campaign
| rambojohnson wrote:
| blah blah blah.. anybody else fatigued by all this nonsense?
| paul7986 wrote:
| sounds like you dont use GPT Many to numerous times a day
| too....
| jwrallie wrote:
| > It's clear to everyone now that this kind of infrastructure is
| going to be the backbone of future economic growth and national
| development.
|
| Well, OpenAI, I think you are mixing up your own backend for
| economic growth with everyone's!
| minimaxir wrote:
| The Stargate link is notable since that has received a large
| amount of backing from the United States government, who hasn't
| been friendly with other countries lately.
| skywhopper wrote:
| Stargate has no US government funding. It was latched onto by
| Trump to pretend he was immediately making some "deals". But
| the whole thing is an illusion of pre-existing projects and
| investments that pre-date the last election.
| egorfine wrote:
| > Partner with countries to help build in-country data center
| capacity.
|
| Except USA banned export of GPUs to like half of the European
| Union, let alone third-world countries.
| andrewinardeer wrote:
| As long as banned GPUs are under USA control and know what data
| is being processed on them then perhaps it will be allowed.
| MegaButts wrote:
| Trump has announced plans to change that (this is news from
| today).
|
| https://archive.is/2eLzj
|
| > The Trump administration plans to rescind Biden-era AI chip
| curbs as part of a broader effort to revise semiconductor trade
| restrictions that have drawn strong opposition from major tech
| companies and foreign governments, according to people familiar
| with the matter.
| skywhopper wrote:
| This is disturbing to read and wonder what other countries are
| going to want "democratic" AI developed in partnership with and
| "led by" the US and Trump.
| verdverm wrote:
| Probably other "democratic" countries?
| kiernanmcgowan wrote:
| > We want to help these countries, and in the process, spread
| democratic AI
|
| I'm reading this in the same voice as Helldivers 2 "managed
| democracy"
| Trasmatta wrote:
| They used the word "democratic" 8 times in that post. I'm not
| sure that word means what they think it means.
| krackers wrote:
| As opposed to those "unaligned" communist open-source models.
| As a proud freedom-loving citizen of the West you wouldn't
| want to support those now would you?
|
| I'm reminded of the first half of this wonderful short-story
| that was shared on HN a year back
| https://www.fortressofdoors.com/four-magic-words/
| ASalazarMX wrote:
| It means "ChatGPT aligned with your government agenda".
| GuinansEyebrows wrote:
| "democratic" means "i can pay for _anything i want_ , so i
| will"
| echelon wrote:
| > spread democratic AI
|
| Open weights and code and models? That's the only way to ensure
| sovereignty.
|
| I think this company is a walking oxymoron.
| nicce wrote:
| There was Oracle mentioned, I believe the pricing will be
| perfect.
| slg wrote:
| One of the most shocking aspects of this era of history is the
| number of people who not only end up accidentally resembling or
| aligning with the bad guys of our satire and dystopian fiction,
| but how many of them seem to be actively and intentionally
| pursuing that path. It's the Torment Nexus all the way down.
| roxolotl wrote:
| I really wish I could know if they are earnestly cosplaying
| Lex Luther or if they are just deluded. Of course a good Lex
| Luther cosplay would involve misdirection so it's basically
| impossible to know. It doesn't really matter which one it is
| because the outcome is similar but it would be very
| gratifying to know.
| jMyles wrote:
| ...this is not AI for countries. This is AI for _governments_.
| Those two concepts are diametrically opposed to one another.
| stepanhruda wrote:
| Diametrically opposed? They are distinct, but hardly opposed.
| notpushkin wrote:
| It really depends.
| jMyles wrote:
| Well I guess the time scale is what determines the degree to
| which the distinction becomes opposition. AI is likely to
| persist for tens or hundreds of thousands of years in some
| form. Are any of today's nation states built to last that
| long? I think we all know the answer.
|
| If you have AI which is in the service of an entity which
| proclaims itself to be the sole franchise of government
| authority over a given landmass, it is strictly incorrect to
| say that this AI is "for the country", because it's perfectly
| plausible (and on sufficiently long time scales, inevitable)
| that the country will want to evolve, replace, or deprecate
| that entity.
| mrcwinn wrote:
| Anyone have something positive to say?
| Waterluvian wrote:
| Honest > positive
| mrcwinn wrote:
| Well, sure, but that's irrelevant here.
|
| Most of the commentary is presuming to know something about
| OpenAI's motivations. That's not honesty; it's just an
| opinion. So my question stands. Does anyone have a positive
| opinion?
|
| Here's a take. For those of us who use their tools in our day
| to day, we might take for granted that we have the existing
| and new infrastructure to support that product. Is it more
| good than bad that other parts of the world could reach
| beyond their current grasp? I hope so. It might be.
| dbalatero wrote:
| Why should that be a requirement? Do you have anything positive
| to say?
| greenavocado wrote:
| This is a genius move to lock in revenue from countries lacking
| the technological infrastructure and capital to develop and run
| their own "safe" (for the local junta) models. Doubly so that
| OpenAI are experts in censorship - I mean "alignment" - and can
| help local authorities impose a localized censorship regime. The
| logical next step is going hard on promoting "AI Safety" and
| legislating the use of certified approved censored models in each
| locale, and criminalizing the use and possession of unapproved
| models, the same way certain JPEG files carry multi year prison
| sentences or how possession of certain books in certain countries
| carries prison time.
| Leary wrote:
| Translation:
|
| You provide the capital and the data, we'll co-own the data
| centers share the models until Trump and the US government decide
| to shut it off as a bargaining chip.
| omneity wrote:
| "And as a bonus we'll have the first pick on every little thing
| your citizens are thinking about."
| hoshikihao wrote:
| Why do you restrict people from Chinese Mainland from using
| ChatGPT?
| rikafurude21 wrote:
| I dont get the proposition, they want to build DCs in partnering
| countries to run GPT on? Who is this useful for, except for
| OpenAI to get lower latency connections to their customers?
| eksu wrote:
| Not latencies, think data privacy / keeping queries and data
| from leaving sovereign borders. This way, if there is some
| local instance / everything is local than the datacenter and
| service are subject to local laws and regulations (and
| alternatively you're not subject to foriegn the laws and
| regulations (and agencies).
| gerash wrote:
| locality is good for resilience and latency but for privacy?
| how does it work?
|
| How can one audit that the bytes going from a DC in country A
| to a DC in the US is not the user queries but some telemetry
| data for example? Presumably you don't get to look at the
| unencrypted packets
| eldenring wrote:
| I mean its useful to the customers who get lower latency too.
| 867-5309 wrote:
| seeking cheap land, electricity and labour. this stunt is bound
| to backfire
| stego-tech wrote:
| So let me get this straight: countries fund the infrastructure,
| shoulder the risk, dole out taxpayer money to the for-profit arm
| of OpenAI, weaken privacy laws, and hand over taxpayer data
| for...nothing? It just reads like a "hey gullible suckers, give
| us your land/money/data and we'll let you slap our logo on stuff
| until it's no longer economically convenient for us to do so, at
| which point we'll demand you subsidize us because we can claim
| we're indispensable/too big to fail" grift to me, unless I'm
| missing something.
| bnjms wrote:
| This is the leader pg admires?
| light_hue_1 wrote:
| So they're running out of large enough companies as customers.
| Now they want governments to pay them.
| blibble wrote:
| > These secure data centers will help support the sovereignty of
| a country's data
|
| there is no data sovereignty if there's a US entity at the top
| I_am_tiberius wrote:
| As a consumer, this makes me afraid.
| maartenscholl wrote:
| Democratic AI is non-negotiable
| Sol- wrote:
| Comes with a free US government backdoor to all of the foreign
| citizens' data and AI usage.
|
| Though of course this is already the status quo for all US
| companies abroad, so you have to give props to OpenAI for
| spelling it out explicitly: Give up what remains of your digital
| sovereignty to the US government and you get a small piece of the
| AGI pie.
| tuyguntn wrote:
| additionally, anytime you oppose US government ideas, data
| centers in your country gets shutdown.
| H8crilA wrote:
| So that's just (or "just") locating the inference infrastructure
| inside the user's country? All operations, deployment, all
| training, tuning and development, contract negotiations remain
| the same?
| siquick wrote:
| This sounds like the sales pitch for the AI Prime Ministers in
| Ray Naylers excellent new book, Where The Axe is Buried.
|
| https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374615369/wheretheaxeisbu...
| hlava wrote:
| Looks like OpenAI is trying to set the narrative, literally.
| koakuma-chan wrote:
| Finally, Ukraine will get an AI that can correctly answer which
| country Crimea belongs to.
| marviel wrote:
| every day the culture grows nearer
| estebarb wrote:
| In the post-truth era, with fascism gaining adepts all across the
| world... who would want to give a government editorial powers on
| generative AI?
|
| I'm deeply pessimistic.
| Y_Y wrote:
| Hey sama, ballsy move!
|
| Have you considered that this proposition is even too ridiculous
| for current reality?
| philip1209 wrote:
| I guess Norway as first customer.
| cheriot wrote:
| "We will trade control for datacenter subsidies"
|
| Brilliant in a Bond villain way
| jsnell wrote:
| > Through formalized infrastructure collaborations, and in
| coordination with the US government, OpenAI will:
|
| > Partner countries also would invest in expanding the global
| Stargate Project--and thus in continued US-led AI leadership and
| a global, growing network effect for democratic AI.
|
| Yeah, good luck with that pitch... I have to assume that the
| target market for this page is not other countries, but the US
| leadership.
| stevage wrote:
| I sure did not expect to see Trump's name used in a positive way
| when talking about supporting democracy.
| neilv wrote:
| They mention a good point (which probably most countries already
| realized), but the obvious answer is to invest in _lowercase_
| open AI, not uppercase OpenAI.
| mooreds wrote:
| On several of Tyler Cowen's recent podcasts, he has said
| essentially "there are really only two countries that have AI,
| China and the USA. Does this mean that other countries (like
| Peru) won't really have a functioning, powerful government when
| AI runs everything".
|
| See https://conversationswithtyler.com/episodes/chris-dixon/
|
| > As you know, not many countries have serious AI companies, and
| even those in Europe may or may not last. They're not obviously
| mega profitable. Let's say you're the government of Peru, and you
| can turn over your education system to some foreign, maybe
| American, AIs. You can turn over how your treasury is managed to
| the AIs. You can turn over your national defense to the AIs. None
| of these are Peruvian companies most likely. In the final
| analysis, are we even left with the government of Peru? Or has
| it, in some sense, been pseudo privatized to the companies that
| are running the structures, and indeed to the AI itself?
|
| Interesting to have OpenAI offer up AI infra so other countries
| are not at quite as large a disadvantage. Also really good for
| their business.
| fancyfredbot wrote:
| This is simultaneously why most people desperately want to invest
| in OpenAI and at the same time why all the best gen AI
| researchers want to work for anthropic. The less you understand
| the more impressive this seems. Conversley the more you
| understand the more embarrassing this seems.
| hayst4ck wrote:
| OpenAI is getting pretty dystopian quite fast.
|
| I don't know if anyone say Marco Rubio's shameless use of OpenAI
| for "democracy": Germany just gave its spy agency
| new powers to surveil the opposition. That's not
| democracy--it's tyranny in disguise. What is truly
| extremist is not the popular AfD--which took second in the
| recent election--but rather the establishment's deadly open
| border immigration policies that the AfD opposes.
| Germany should reverse course.
|
| This is absolutely OpenAI phrasing inducing em dashes.
|
| "A new initiative to support countries around the world that want
| to build on democratic AI rails." "All these things contribute to
| broad distribution of the benefits of AI, discourage the
| concentration of power, and help advance our mission."
|
| This is deeply Orwellian.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-05-07 23:00 UTC)