There is a certain degree of that for sure. These people really see themselves as “destroyers of worlds” when in fact they are becoming a but amusing in how the

There is a certain degree of that for sure. These people really see themselves as “destroyers of worlds” when in fact they are becoming a but amusing in how they try to inflate their importance on the scene. But the sense of urgency cause by the supposed incoming terror, destitution, and despair seem to indicate these people would almost enjoy seeing it happen. Notice how their marketing doesnt focus as much on the benefits as it does on the drawbacks. It’s as if they _want_ the negatives to come to fruition and some sort of radical change to happen as a result of it. Maybe i am reading too much into it and giving sam and the other folks at openai too much credit, but the idea that they might be accelerationists is so crazy that it might actually be fact. Why else would you go above and beyond to build products that you yourself claim can be extremely harmful, they require radical change, other than you wanting for that negative outcome to happen so that you can achieve said change? Didnt the person say or write somewhere that he wants to solve inequality? And since ai would drastically increase inequality by extracting work from the masses and selling it for the profits of the few at massive scale doesnt it is logical to believe that he’a aiming to prove a point. Speeding things up, cause social upheaval, that leads to social change. The definition of that ideology.