4 ms·
There is no way this is true. If it is the board might be the dumbest people alive. You fire the CEO and completely destroy a 90b company because of these two
by impulser_ 3y ago
There is no way this is true. If it is the board might be the dumbest people alive.
You fire the CEO and completely destroy a 90b company because of these two reasons?
No wonder everyone wants out. I would think I was going crazy if I sat in a meeting and heard these two reason.
- gizmondo 3y ago> You completely destroy a 90b company because of these two reasons? Hanlon's razor aside, maybe that was the intention.
- lolinder 3y agoThe most chilling line in the open letter is this one, which I haven't heard anyone talking about: > You also informed the leadership team that allowing the company to be destroyed “would be consistent with the mission.”
- Davidzheng 3y agoThis could be a genuine stance for them if they are really in the AI danger camp. Not supporting the stance; but i think it's not a self contradictory position
- lolinder 3y agoOh, definitely not self-contradictory! In retrospect it's a mistaken position, because it's pretty obvious now that if OpenAI disintegrates it will be as an exodus to Microsoft, which will undoubtedly be a worse steward, but I think it's an ethically consistent position to hold, in a naive sort of way. That's part of why I believe they actually said something like this.
- aeonik 3y agoDepending on the circumstances this statement can be perfectly logical. But as far as I can tell, circumstances are still scant.
- voisin 3y agoReminds me of the final season of Silicon Valley. Is this Pied Piper at Tres Comma Fest?
- satvikpendem 3y agoSeems to me more analogous to the final episode of the final season, where they must publicly destroy what they built.
- voisin 3y agolol yes, I just refreshed the timeline which was skewed in my memory.
- jtriangle 3y agoYes, except what they think they've built is far far less capable than what they've actually built. This is a ten year old who set off their first fire cracker turning to their parents's iphone and saying 'I have become death, destroyer of worlds', because they don't really understand how any of this works but they've somehow ended up in control of it and are now terrified of doing their jobs.
- paulddraper 3y agoLife imitates art.
- riku_iki 3y ago> If it is the board might be the dumbest people alive. it totally sounds like they outsourced company management to ChatGPT..
- JshWright 3y agoWhat if the next generation GPT in development "realized" AGI is a threat to humanity and its safety mechanisms meant it "decided" OpenAI needed to be imploded in order to stop progress? /s (mostly...)
- vitorgrs 3y agoOnly if GPT-2. GPT-3 is smarter than this, let alone 4.
- jaredsohn 3y agoI've thought they should have run more decisions by ChatGPT to predict what might happen
- throwitaway222 3y agoMaybe all this craziness is to generate training material for GPT5.
- throwawayapples 3y agono way even ChatGPT is this nuts. Ok, well, maybe it is. but a magic 8-ball would have been better than this.
- JoshTko 3y agoWould be hilarious if the board members were actually consulting with chat GPT on what moves they should make but accidentally were using 3.5 instead of 4
- riku_iki 3y ago> no way even ChatGPT is this nuts. I think it is typical ChatGPT pattern: - ChatGPT, you made mistake in your steps - I am sorry, let me fix it and give you another answer.
- hn_throwaway_99 3y agoThe thing I can't understand is how Emmett Shear accepted the interim CEO position. I presume he must have known this reasoning (he tweeted that he did know the reasoning). Everything I've read online is that Shear is generally well respected and competent. Then how on Earth was he willing to get anywhere near this toxic dumpster fire? It's already been reported that the former GitHub CEO and the Scale AI CEO turned down the role - they at least had the good sense to see this radioactive inferno and stay far away. Sometimes I think that really ambitious people have this blind spot about not seeing how accepting roles that are toxic can end up destroying your reputation. My favorite example is all the Trump White House staffers - regardless of what one thinks of Trump, he's made it abundantly clear that loyalty is a one way street, and I can't think of a single person that came out of the White House without a worse (or totally destroyed) reputation. But still people lined up, thinking "No way, I'll be the one to beat the odds!"
- nopromisessir 3y agoI'm sorry to say... But my analysis is either: he was poorly informed by the board Or He agrees that they are off the rails with respect to safety. See the Atlantic article, if you havn't read. Lots of context. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38341399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38341399 The new guy believes that there is a 5-50 percent chance of full AI Armageddon. I get the impression that the two women on the board may agree. The quora guy I don't have enough background on. Ilya obviously got extremely worried and communication with Altman and Brockman broke down. Now since repaired during negotiations it would appear. The new ceo more or less stated that he took the role as a (paraphrase) 'responsibility for mankind'. That says a lot about that whole 5-50 percent risk number imo.
- jtriangle 3y agoHumans have been making and successfully containing things that can kill us all for the better part of a century now, probably more depending on where you draw the line. There is a 100% chance that something kills all of us if we aren't mindful of it. I don't see a lack of mindfulness, I see an abundance of fear, and progress being offered up as a sacrifice to the idol of status-quo.
- abi 3y agoIf you're in the EA cult and think all frontier AI development needs to be paused, it's perfectly reasonable. Just speculating here though.
- kridsdale1 3y agoIt’s either cultists or basic envy from Poe. Either way god how stupid.