OpenAI's foray into the military market has sparked interest, as the tech giant unveils its open-weight models - the first of their kind in years. These cutting-edge tools have caught the attention of both US military and defense contractors, who see them as a game-changer for highly secure operations.
However, not everyone is convinced that OpenAI's offerings are ahead of the competition. Some defense insiders claim that the company still lags behind its rivals in terms of capabilities. Nevertheless, many are thrilled to have models from an industry leader finally at their disposal, and are willing to overlook this limitation for now.
The US Department of Defense has been actively integrating AI into various aspects of its operations, including battlefield systems and auditing functions. The goal is to create adaptable and flexible models that can be tailored to specific needs. Doug Matty, chief digital and AI officer for the so-called Department of War (the name the Trump administration is using for the Department of Defense), has expressed his enthusiasm for OpenAI's open-source approach.
"This capability must be adaptable and flexible," Matty said. "Our capabilities must be able to adapt to new situations."
The Pentagon plans to utilize these AI systems in various contexts, from routing information to analysts and teams, to automating war-fighting tools. Companies such as Lilt, which contracts with the US military to analyze foreign intelligence, have seen an opportunity to use OpenAI's models for their needs.
Lilt's CEO Spence Green stated that while the initial results were not ideal, he remains optimistic about the potential of gpt-oss models. "With gpt-oss, there's a lot of model competition right now," he said. "More options, the better."
While some experts and suppliers have expressed concerns about relying on open-source models, others see them as an attractive alternative to closed-source options. Kyle Miller, a research analyst at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, noted that open-source AI models offer the military greater accessibility, control, customizability, and privacy.
These models may be particularly valuable in situations requiring immediate responses or when internet interference could be an issue, such as on drones or satellites. Nicolas Chaillan, founder of Ask Sage, emphasized the importance of considering both open and closed-source options, acknowledging that while open models may not yet meet expectations, they still offer benefits.
In conclusion, OpenAI's foray into the military market has sparked interest and debate, with some experts praising the potential benefits of open-source models while others remain skeptical. As the technology continues to evolve, one thing is clear: the US Department of Defense will need to weigh its options carefully as it navigates the complexities of AI integration in sensitive contexts.
However, not everyone is convinced that OpenAI's offerings are ahead of the competition. Some defense insiders claim that the company still lags behind its rivals in terms of capabilities. Nevertheless, many are thrilled to have models from an industry leader finally at their disposal, and are willing to overlook this limitation for now.
The US Department of Defense has been actively integrating AI into various aspects of its operations, including battlefield systems and auditing functions. The goal is to create adaptable and flexible models that can be tailored to specific needs. Doug Matty, chief digital and AI officer for the so-called Department of War (the name the Trump administration is using for the Department of Defense), has expressed his enthusiasm for OpenAI's open-source approach.
"This capability must be adaptable and flexible," Matty said. "Our capabilities must be able to adapt to new situations."
The Pentagon plans to utilize these AI systems in various contexts, from routing information to analysts and teams, to automating war-fighting tools. Companies such as Lilt, which contracts with the US military to analyze foreign intelligence, have seen an opportunity to use OpenAI's models for their needs.
Lilt's CEO Spence Green stated that while the initial results were not ideal, he remains optimistic about the potential of gpt-oss models. "With gpt-oss, there's a lot of model competition right now," he said. "More options, the better."
While some experts and suppliers have expressed concerns about relying on open-source models, others see them as an attractive alternative to closed-source options. Kyle Miller, a research analyst at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, noted that open-source AI models offer the military greater accessibility, control, customizability, and privacy.
These models may be particularly valuable in situations requiring immediate responses or when internet interference could be an issue, such as on drones or satellites. Nicolas Chaillan, founder of Ask Sage, emphasized the importance of considering both open and closed-source options, acknowledging that while open models may not yet meet expectations, they still offer benefits.
In conclusion, OpenAI's foray into the military market has sparked interest and debate, with some experts praising the potential benefits of open-source models while others remain skeptical. As the technology continues to evolve, one thing is clear: the US Department of Defense will need to weigh its options carefully as it navigates the complexities of AI integration in sensitive contexts.
OpenAI's foray into the military market is a big deal, but are they really that ahead of the competition? 
I'm not buying it just because their models are open-source. From what I've seen, other companies like Lilt and Ask Sage are already using them and getting decent results. It's not like they're breaking new ground here.
Just because something is free doesn't mean it's safe. The US military needs to be careful about who they trust with their tech. And what about the whole ' adaptability' thing Matty mentioned? That sounds like a nice buzzword to me. What does it really mean in practice?
they finally got into the mil market and ppl r like "oh wow" i mean yeah, some defence insiders might be all like "wait what's good" but who cares? 
companies are gonna make bank off this tech, lol, like lilt is already seeing $$$ 
and the fact that companies like Lilt are already jumping on board with gpt-oss is a game-changer 
Spence Green's optimism about OpenAI's potential is totally reasonable imo 
Kyle Miller makes so much sense about accessibility, control and customizability being key here 
I mean, who wouldn't want to use open-source AI models that can be tailored to specific needs? 
It's like the US Department of Defense is finally catching up with the times 
and it's all because of OpenAI's innovative approach 
We gotta stay vigilant over here! 
. it's like they're pouring money into a pot, hoping to catch the next big thing without actually understanding what they're getting themselves into.
. But at the same time, having industry leaders like OpenAI on board is definitely a good thing 
.
. It's all about accessibility, control, customizability, and privacy 
. Still, it's cool to see the military exploring new options 
.
. I think they're trying to get ahead of the competition by making it easier for people to access these cutting-edge tools, which is super smart. However, some ppl are worried about security concerns 
but imo, they still got a ways to go before they catch up to the competition 
at least with closed-source models, you know what you're getting. with openAI's, youre playing russian roulette