3 ms·

I think I’m on sutskever’s side in all this- AI safety, to the extent that such a thing is possible, is certainly more important than making a bunch of money in

I think I’m on sutskever’s side in all this- AI safety, to the extent that such a thing is possible, is certainly more important than making a bunch of money in the short term. Potentially, this is the future of the whole human race you’re talking about- not the time to go on some ego driven macho crusade to make a name for yourself. It’s just terrifying that these are the kind of people fucking around with technology they don’t even fully understand. Have they never read cat’s cradle? This technology is more dangerous than the hydrogen bomb, more dangerous than smallpox, and they’re just throwing it out there for everyone to play with. Calling this irresponsible is like calling the ocean a puddle.

fatherzine 3y ago
The only winning move is not to play. Sutskever has no clue how to contain the genie, nobody has. Why do we put our hope in some engineer or another, beats me. There are throngs waiting in the wings for their shot at ephemeral glory and riches.
EPWN3D 3y ago
Disagree. The fact that the board are so cagey about why exactly they sacked Altman in the first place (other than some vague hand waving about high-minded idealism) speaks volumes. They sacked him because as head of a for-profit corporation, he tried to develop products that would (gasp!) make money? Seriously? Investor returns are already limited in their corporate structure, which is supposed to serve as the check on the profit motive. If they don't think that's sufficient anymore, then they should amend their corporate charter and renegotiate with their investor, not fire the CEO out of nowhere. Unless the whole point was to get investors to withdraw money, in which case... um well done. I'm not some Sam Altman cultist, and I don't particularly care what happens to OpenAI. But this smells like a garden-variety Silicon Valley board coup. The board are trying to present this as them standing between The World and Armageddon, and they're doing a very bad job.

fatherzine 3y ago

The only winning move is not to play. Sutskever has no clue how to contain the genie, nobody has. Why do we put our hope in some engineer or another, beats me. There are throngs waiting in the wings for their shot at ephemeral glory and riches.

EPWN3D 3y ago

Disagree. The fact that the board are so cagey about why exactly they sacked Altman in the first place (other than some vague hand waving about high-minded idealism) speaks volumes. They sacked him because as head of a for-profit corporation, he tried to develop products that would (gasp!) make money? Seriously? Investor returns are already limited in their corporate structure, which is supposed to serve as the check on the profit motive. If they don't think that's sufficient anymore, then they should amend their corporate charter and renegotiate with their investor, not fire the CEO out of nowhere. Unless the whole point was to get investors to withdraw money, in which case... um well done. I'm not some Sam Altman cultist, and I don't particularly care what happens to OpenAI. But this smells like a garden-variety Silicon Valley board coup. The board are trying to present this as them standing between The World and Armageddon, and they're doing a very bad job.