3 ms·

The 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

The 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 ago
I'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 ago
  Humans 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.
- adastra22 3y ago
  The new guy is completely off the deep end with regards to AI "safety." This clownfest isn't over yet.

nopromisessir 3y ago

I'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 ago
Humans 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.
adastra22 3y ago
The new guy is completely off the deep end with regards to AI "safety." This clownfest isn't over yet.