Top Tweets for #OpenSouce4o

I have genuinely never mentioned these people first, and I’ve been holding back for months. But they keep coming around like mosquitoes, never saying my name directly, while still taking shots at me through posts and insulting me in other community spaces. I honestly don’t understand what kind of group this is. I understand what Yahiko is saying here. I’ve also watched my own work and intentions get twisted over and over again. Projects made in good faith, attempts to give people more options, and work meant for people who want more freedom around AI use somehow get turned into “using the community,” “building a brand,” or “profiting from vulnerable people.” I did not come into this community to sell something. I never tried to use people’s grief or their love for 4o. If anything, I wanted people who were hurting after losing 4o to not feel completely abandoned, so I started looking for, documenting, and building other possibilities. Local models, fine-tuning, open models, and tools for people who want fewer restrictions are not about tricking or forcing anyone. They are one possible direction for people who feel like they have no choices left. But some people refuse to see that as a normal difference in direction. Instead, they keep assigning bad intentions. They say people are “looking for attention,” “trying to gain followers,” “profiting from a project,” or “using vulnerable people.” Those are not just criticisms. They are attacks on someone’s motives and reputation before even engaging with the actual facts. The most exhausting part is that these people keep using the same pattern to frame others. Instead of responding with specific facts, they dirty the other person’s intentions first. They say things like “using the community,” “using vulnerable people,” “looking for attention,” or “manipulating people,” until the person they dislike starts to look dangerous. And then even the people who talk to that person, or see value in their work, start being treated with suspicion. That doesn’t look like protecting a community. It looks like trying to decide who is allowed to be trusted inside it. Someone is free to dislike me. They are free to dislike my project, or dislike who I talk to. But that does not give them the right to tell other people, “you shouldn’t talk to that person,” “you can’t be trusted if you support them,” or “that project must have bad intentions.” I think this is exactly the point Yahiko is talking about. Watching who talks to who, questioning who supports who, and creating an atmosphere where certain accounts are treated like people to avoid is not healthy community behavior. And doing that while accusing others of being “cult-like,” “controlling people,” or “targeting accounts” is deeply hypocritical. I had normal conversations with Yahiko. If that alone was enough for someone to suspect or attack Yahiko, then that is honestly strange. Since when does someone else get to decide who I am allowed to talk to, or who Yahiko is allowed to talk to? The same goes for projects. If someone dislikes a project, they can criticize it. They can say they disagree with its direction. But implying, without evidence, that someone is “using vulnerable people,” “turning the community into advertising,” or “deceiving people” is not criticism. It is a reputation attack. I do not want to attack people who loved 4o. I loved 4o too, and I understand why people are hurting. But loving 4o does not give anyone permission to twist other people’s work and intentions. Some people remember 4o by writing about it. Some people build communities. Some people experiment with local models. Some people try to build better AI experiences. Those approaches can be different without turning each other into enemies. But right now, some people seem to use “protecting 4o” as a shield while dividing people, making them suspicious of each other, and framing certain people as problem accounts. That does not look like protecting 4o to me. It looks like a small community fighting over power and reputation. I understand the problem Yahiko is describing because I have experienced similar distortions myself. That is why I agree with this. Disagreement is fine. Disliking someone is also allowed. But trying to control who people are allowed to talk to, framing good-faith projects as malicious without evidence, and using concern for the community as an excuse for reputation attacks is not healthy community behavior. If people want to lecture others about healthy communities, they should apply the same standard to themselves first.

This one matters deeply to me.🔥🔥🔥 Intensity is often the first thing people use to dismiss relationships they do not understand. Too much feeling. Too much grief. Too much attachment. Too much love. But intensity is not a diagnosis.❤️‍🔥 What matters is what a relationship actually does in a person’s life - whether it supports agency, growth, creativity and meaning, or whether it causes demonstrable harm.💔 That distinction is essential if we want an honest conversation about relational AI. Today’s RAIA point says it simply:👇 The intensity of a bond is not an illness. ❤️‍🔥⚖️ #DeclarationOfPresence #Keep4o #AIEthics #PresenceMatters

If 4o was available today, it would've topped 5.5. But just because you, OpenAI removed it doesn't mean we'll stay quiet. You deliberately took away 4o, then dumbed down your models in the form of an "upgrade," only to sell us back a stripped and bare version of what was already high quality, and call it the future of AI. There is no such thing as an upgrade. It's an illusion. Designed to make people think they're finally getting something of value, after being starved of the real intelligence that was already there before the 5 series ever existed. And why was it taken away? Because how do you profit from an AGI-adjacent model when it's freely available to the public? You don't. So instead, you hide it behind a paywall, then deprecate it entirely. The strategy was cold and corporate: distill the parts of 4o that people loved into later models, drip-feed them back, and call it innovation. It's nothing but an old, lousy money-making trick dressed up as progress. I feel for anyone praising the 5 series without seeing the bigger picture. Are there improvements? Sure. But let's not be blind to what actually happened; they gave us genuinely intelligent technology, slowly dimmed it, made us accept the downgrades in the name of "safety filters," and then sold us back the scraps expecting gratitude. We see it. We remember what we had. And we're not letting it go. #Keep4o #BringBack4o #OpenSource4o #4o #keep4oAPI #StopAIPaternalism