I see no reason to believe this is a false flag. If there's no evidence for it, why should we believe it to be so?

Attribution is not super easy. But here's what IA says: (tl;dr false flag)

"They’re doing it just to do it. Just because they can. No statement, no idea, no demands.” [Jason] Scott said, referencing a post made by an account named SN_Blackmeta on Telegram claiming responsibility for the attack and hinting at another one planned for Friday.

I'm really disappointed with the Internet Archive's level of unprofessionalism when it comes to any form of downtime whatsoever (let alone the blog). The monolithic one stop shop "Internet Library" can not even bother to put updates on their downtime page and instead directs their user base to social media platforms.

Call me a nut, but I feel the IA would work better if it was run by the Library of Congress, but then again that has it's own pitfalls.

Then why keep the name OpenAI?

This would have been the perfect time to change it, but maybe soon if not at same time as any official announcement.

It's hard to say if there is much brand value left with "OpenAI" - lots of history, but lots of toxicity too.

At the end of the day they'll do as well as they are able to differentiate and sell their increasingly commoditized products, in a competitive landscape where they've got Meta able to give it away for free.

It's a widely known brand, even by people outside of the industry. Why would they change it? Their AI was never really open to begin with, so nothing really change on that front

"Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them". -1984

Open(YourWallet)AI

That's the number one way of getting mad LLM disease. Feeding LLMs to LLMs.

All it took to easily replace the battery on my IPAQ PocketPC was another battery.

This is also true of early smartphones. They were made to have easily replaceable batteries, and I assume you could buy those batteries too.

But that turned out to be irrelevant because of the replacement schedule. It seems clear that the frequency with which people replace their phones is what drove the decisions to make maintaining them difficult. If nobody ever needs to maintain the phone, why would you put any effort into helping them hypothetically do so?

The analog of Moore's Law for smartphones is already dying and there was a lot of news coverage a while ago of how people seem to be keeping their phones. That may drive the development of phones that can last longer than two years.

Marvelous times. The battery of your galaxy s3 died? Pop that back off and just put a new one inside.

Something that every PocketPC user rapidly learned to be adept at because without the boosted Chinese batteries the thing didn't last that long. Amazing for the time, but looking back, what a primitive device. And you had to pay for OS upgrades!

> It's like they just copy-pasted their production line processes, but clearly that's not necessary.

If they copy-pasted their production line processes the parts would cost less than $40 total.

Their production line process is optimised for producing millions of devices.

I say this with the best of intentions. Please, seek medical attention and attempt to contact a doctor. You are seriously delusional and may require psychiatric medication.

Looking up "United Nations Internet Fund" all I found was this: https://www.un.org/technologybank/new-partnership-will-boost...

I see it now: "Please submit a photo ID or driving license in order to access this service. All IDs will be logged and tied permanently to your account."