3 ms·
Perhaps they don’t want to work for a board of directors which is openly hostile to the work they’re doing?
by thepasswordis 3y ago
Perhaps they don’t want to work for a board of directors which is openly hostile to the work they’re doing?
- meepmorp 3y agoI don't think wanting to make sure that their technology doesn't cause harm equates to being hostile to the work itself.
- pixl97 3y agoThat would seem based on the individuals motivation at the end of the day... It's easy to imagine two archetypes 1) The person motivated to make AGI and make it safe. 2) The person motivated to make AGI at any cost and profit from it. It seems like OpenAI may be pushing for type 1 at the moment, but the typical problem with capitalism is it will commonly fund type 2 businesses. Who 'wins' really breaks down to if there are more type 1 or 2 people and the relative successes of each.
- anonyfox 3y agoNot at OAI or some researcher, but I‘d be in an archetype 3: I‘d do anything I can to make true AGI a reality, without safety concerns or wanting to profit from it.
- staticman2 3y agoThe boarded sided with the chief scientist and co-founder of OpenAI in an internal dispute. How does that show hostility to the work OpenAI is doing?
- YetAnotherNick 3y agoIlya is pushing the unsafe AGI narrrative to stop public progress and make OpenAI more closed and intentionally slow to deliver. There are definitely people who are not sold by this.
- chongli 3y agoPerhaps they didn't like the work they were doing? If they're experts in the field, they may have preferred to continue to work on research. Whereas it sounds like Sam was pushing them to work on products and growth.