4 ms·

I don’t think they necessarily owe the public an explanation, and I’m fairly sure that privately everyone that needs to know, already knows.

freedomben 3y ago
You don't think that as a non-profit, the public is owed and explanation? As the public, we exempt them from taxes that everyone else has to pay, because we acknowledge that nonprofit is in the interest of people. I think they do owe us an explanation. If they were a private for-profit company, I would probably feel differently, but given their non-profit status, and the fact that their mission is explicitly to serve humanity with AI that they worry could destroy the race or the planet for more, I think they owe us an explanation.
- 627467 3y ago
  I'm sure the law specifies what the public is owed. And if not, I'm sure there's plenty reason to test this in court.
jacquesm 3y ago
Actually, their statements are overflowing from bits and pieces of how they are doing this 'for all of humanity' so I'm not so sure about that. Think about it this way: if in the 1940's nuclear weapons were being developed in private hands don't you think the entity behind that would owe the public - or the government - some insight into what is going on?
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  Think about it this way: if in the 1940's nuclear weapons were being developed in private hands don't you think the entity behind that would owe the public - or the government - some insight into what is going on? I'd read the hell out of that alt-history novel, I can tell you that much. Not so much the "Manhattan Project" as the "Tuxedo Park Project."
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    If that time line had materialized you might not have been around to read it :) But it's an interesting thought. Howard Hughes came close to having that kind of power and Musk has more or less eclipsed him now. Sam Altman could easily eclipse both, he seems to be better at power games (unfortunately, but that's what it is). Personally I think people that are that power hungry should be kept away from the levers of real power as much as possible because they will use it if the opportunity presents itself.

freedomben 3y ago

You don't think that as a non-profit, the public is owed and explanation? As the public, we exempt them from taxes that everyone else has to pay, because we acknowledge that nonprofit is in the interest of people. I think they do owe us an explanation. If they were a private for-profit company, I would probably feel differently, but given their non-profit status, and the fact that their mission is explicitly to serve humanity with AI that they worry could destroy the race or the planet for more, I think they owe us an explanation.

627467 3y ago
I'm sure the law specifies what the public is owed. And if not, I'm sure there's plenty reason to test this in court.

jacquesm 3y ago

Actually, their statements are overflowing from bits and pieces of how they are doing this 'for all of humanity' so I'm not so sure about that. Think about it this way: if in the 1940's nuclear weapons were being developed in private hands don't you think the entity behind that would owe the public - or the government - some insight into what is going on?

CamperBob2 3y ago
Think about it this way: if in the 1940's nuclear weapons were being developed in private hands don't you think the entity behind that would owe the public - or the government - some insight into what is going on? I'd read the hell out of that alt-history novel, I can tell you that much. Not so much the "Manhattan Project" as the "Tuxedo Park Project."
- jacquesm 3y ago
  If that time line had materialized you might not have been around to read it :) But it's an interesting thought. Howard Hughes came close to having that kind of power and Musk has more or less eclipsed him now. Sam Altman could easily eclipse both, he seems to be better at power games (unfortunately, but that's what it is). Personally I think people that are that power hungry should be kept away from the levers of real power as much as possible because they will use it if the opportunity presents itself.