> While this sounds generous (and in some ways it is), it does not address the general point that GP is making. That is, the systematic disadvantage which large parts of humanity have w.r.t. to access to the tools. You could say they can't drive a Lambhorgini either, but that also doesn't solve the problem.

This was also the case historically, when being at certain universities, with better professors, better scope of works available at the library, etc, would necessarily provide systematic advantage.

This is the reality of progress. It is always unevely distrubuted.

I do think the open source side of model development is a substantial counter to the pessimism here.

You're absolutely right (pun intended).

An aside: It was a very nice gesture and completely unexpected by me, so even if it doesn't work out, it made my day. I personally believe that kind gestures have a lot of power.

Back on topic: There is a real danger of the gap between rich and poor universities significantly widening in all fields if the rich can afford Pro level models, or even hardware that can run their own comparable models, and this being fiscally inaccessible to the rest.

One can sweep this under the rug by blaming the educational funding but this just shoots down all discussion. Even if GDP of a country goes up by a lot -- such as Poland -- it takes time before any budget benefit trickles to the education budget, and with some governments it might never do.

I believe Microsoft et al do have the most power here to boost affordable access to AI for researchers on a large scale; the fact that they cut some too expensive models (Opus, 5.5) from their academic benefits package is a grim omen. I do realize they would like universities to pay them also, and ultimately the universities should do that -- but then we are back at the institutional level of the problem.

Its a problem of the individual institutions and countries. The budget required for AI tools currently is negligible compared to other university expenses. We don't need to call everything a systemic disadvantage when the disadvantaged (at the institution level) have agency here.

I mean, I don't think OpenAI should be wading into the policies and practices of foreign institutions and governments. Look at all the blowback we see from the collision of Anthropic or OpenAI and the US government.

At present, the tools are available for whomever wants to buy them. Not OpenAI's fault that parent comment's government and/or institutions policies haven't been updated to allow for their purchase and use.

I'd argue that the OpenAI dude/dudettes level of generosity is appropriate given the circumstances.