3 ms·
None of those organizations are OpenAI, which has yet to establish a history of dishonest dealing. It's not usually a good idea for government agencies to assum
by Veen 3y ago
None of those organizations are OpenAI, which has yet to establish a history of dishonest dealing. It's not usually a good idea for government agencies to assume that every company in a particular field is maximally dishonest and criminally inclined.
The goal is compliance, not punishment. So it's better to give them a chance to comply, a warning, and then prosecute and fine if they continue to flout the rules.
- largepeepee 3y agoSwitching entire business models to exploit the market, after receiving goodwill contributions/collaborations under their nonprofit model already sets a bad precedent. So I don't think they have a clean record now, and people are simply wise to be skeptical.
- dnissley 3y agoWhat reasonable action could they take to satisfy your skepticism?
- C-x_C-f 3y ago> It's not usually a good idea for government agencies to assume that every company in a particular field is maximally dishonest and criminally inclined. Depends what you mean by "maximally." I think it's safe to assume that every company tries to maximize dishonesty after accounting for its cost (i.e. fines).