3 ms·

After everything I've seen in the time since Altman's ouster then reinstatement at OpenAI, I would definitely admit I was wrong in my original assessment of the

After everything I've seen in the time since Altman's ouster then reinstatement at OpenAI, I would definitely admit I was wrong in my original assessment of the board's actions. While I still think how they went about it was both naive and very poorly executed, everything I've read online (both from the board members but, more importantly, from others in-the-know at OpenAI) makes me believe their action was warranted, especially given the stated function of the OpenAI board. I've never met Sam Altman, but the last "straw" for me was the recent Scarlett Johansson brouhaha. While I think it's pretty clear they wanted their AI system to evoke Johansson's persona in the movie, OpenAI would have at least had some level of plausible deniability if it weren't for Altman's 3-letter "her" tweet. It's like he just couldn't help himself - it seemed the embodiment of these "tech boy-princes" who, despite all their often lauded "genius", just seem incapable of shutting TFU. I honestly don't mean to solely dump on Altman (see also Musk, Andreessen, etc.), it's just that he's obviously a focus of this article. But everything I've heard about nearly every other tech billionaire makes me think I absolutely do not want them independently in charge of humanity's future with AI.

prox 2y ago
Why do these figures all have like this immature thing about them?
- greenchair 2y ago
  just part of being a sociopath
  - jamiek88 2y ago
    I’m starting to believe one cannot be a billionaire without being mentally ill.
- hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
  My theory is that we're all pretty much that immature, but the rest of us have normal societal guardrails confirming that we're not actually as special and smart as we think we are. But these tech bros and others with that much power have no such societal constraints. And, importantly, they did have huge impacts on society: creating the first popular Internet browser, jumpstarting the EV revolution, exposing the masses to AI - these all really were enormous accomplishments. So it's not that hard to go from there to convincing yourself that your shit don't stink and that you have some unique insight into all areas of human existence.
  - throwup238 2y ago
    > My theory is that we're all pretty much that immature, but the rest of us have normal societal guardrails confirming that we're not actually as special and smart as we think we are. I'd offer up the majority of the billionaire class up as a counter example. Most of them aren't household names even though they can easily afford it and their total population is up to over 2,700 people according to Wikipedia.
    - astrange 2y ago
      I think most of the millionaire+ class would rather spend money to become /less/ popular rather than more. Consumer facing founder CEOs and musicians are just two subclasses whose job means not doing that.
- csense 2y ago
  In order to get to this kind of place, you have to pass three filters: - Your org must be big / famous - You must be the public face of your org - You have an irresistable urge to say edgy things you probably shouldn't People who are comfortable with their place in life are less likely to make it through this filter.
- felipeerias 2y ago
  Altman's "her" tweet gathered 21 million impressions and tend of thousands of likes and retweets. It must be hard to remain sane and equanimous when you can command that level of attention with just three letters.
diego_sandoval 2y ago
Your whole argument about the Johannson issue depends on the presumption that OpenAI will end up being the loser in the legal battle or in the court of public opinion. I think OpenAI will end up winning the legal battle. The voice is not similar enough to Johannson's for her to win. On the court of public opinion, OpenAI will lose trust from a small portion of the population, but for the rest of the world, it's not gonna matter at all. The positive impact of "OpenAI just made the movie Her a reality" is bigger than the negative impact.
- XorNot 2y ago
  Also that a product seeming "dangerous" makes it seem more effective when you're trying to sell it. You see this all the time - it's why "military-grade" gets tossed on every random consumer gadget in regards to some specification. It's why if I told you my showerhead's pressure makes it illegal to buy locally, you'd think "ooh that's probably a really good showerhead" (yes I made this up, yes I was thinking of Seinfeld when I did).
whimsicalism 2y ago
I have mixed feelings about all the recent controversy and coverage. But frankly if the ScarJo thing was at all significant in how you assess OAI or x-risk, I’m somewhat inclined to discount the opinion.
- talldayo 2y ago
  I'm inclined to discount opinions that include "x-risk" as a serious talking point.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    Regardless of what you think of AI, there are multiple plausible existential risks to humanity that exist. Why you think that should be beyond consideration is beyond me, but people have all sorts of zany beliefs I don't understand
    - talldayo 2y ago
      Sensationalism is a manipulation tactic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinkmanship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinkmanship LLMs and existential threats don't get mentioned in the same breath, at least by the serious non-tinfoil-hat types. Preeminent concerns include global warming and sustaining Malthusian growth. AI (and more specifically, OpenAI) indeed deserves to be relegated to the echelons of celebrity drama and not the grown-up table of scientific progress. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

prox 2y ago

Why do these figures all have like this immature thing about them?

greenchair 2y ago
just part of being a sociopath
- jamiek88 2y ago
  I’m starting to believe one cannot be a billionaire without being mentally ill.
hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
My theory is that we're all pretty much that immature, but the rest of us have normal societal guardrails confirming that we're not actually as special and smart as we think we are. But these tech bros and others with that much power have no such societal constraints. And, importantly, they did have huge impacts on society: creating the first popular Internet browser, jumpstarting the EV revolution, exposing the masses to AI - these all really were enormous accomplishments. So it's not that hard to go from there to convincing yourself that your shit don't stink and that you have some unique insight into all areas of human existence.
- throwup238 2y ago
  > My theory is that we're all pretty much that immature, but the rest of us have normal societal guardrails confirming that we're not actually as special and smart as we think we are. I'd offer up the majority of the billionaire class up as a counter example. Most of them aren't household names even though they can easily afford it and their total population is up to over 2,700 people according to Wikipedia.
  - astrange 2y ago
    I think most of the millionaire+ class would rather spend money to become /less/ popular rather than more. Consumer facing founder CEOs and musicians are just two subclasses whose job means not doing that.
csense 2y ago
In order to get to this kind of place, you have to pass three filters: - Your org must be big / famous - You must be the public face of your org - You have an irresistable urge to say edgy things you probably shouldn't People who are comfortable with their place in life are less likely to make it through this filter.
felipeerias 2y ago
Altman's "her" tweet gathered 21 million impressions and tend of thousands of likes and retweets. It must be hard to remain sane and equanimous when you can command that level of attention with just three letters.

diego_sandoval 2y ago

Your whole argument about the Johannson issue depends on the presumption that OpenAI will end up being the loser in the legal battle or in the court of public opinion. I think OpenAI will end up winning the legal battle. The voice is not similar enough to Johannson's for her to win. On the court of public opinion, OpenAI will lose trust from a small portion of the population, but for the rest of the world, it's not gonna matter at all. The positive impact of "OpenAI just made the movie Her a reality" is bigger than the negative impact.

XorNot 2y ago
Also that a product seeming "dangerous" makes it seem more effective when you're trying to sell it. You see this all the time - it's why "military-grade" gets tossed on every random consumer gadget in regards to some specification. It's why if I told you my showerhead's pressure makes it illegal to buy locally, you'd think "ooh that's probably a really good showerhead" (yes I made this up, yes I was thinking of Seinfeld when I did).

whimsicalism 2y ago

I have mixed feelings about all the recent controversy and coverage. But frankly if the ScarJo thing was at all significant in how you assess OAI or x-risk, I’m somewhat inclined to discount the opinion.

talldayo 2y ago
I'm inclined to discount opinions that include "x-risk" as a serious talking point.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  Regardless of what you think of AI, there are multiple plausible existential risks to humanity that exist. Why you think that should be beyond consideration is beyond me, but people have all sorts of zany beliefs I don't understand
  - talldayo 2y ago
    Sensationalism is a manipulation tactic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinkmanship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinkmanship LLMs and existential threats don't get mentioned in the same breath, at least by the serious non-tinfoil-hat types. Preeminent concerns include global warming and sustaining Malthusian growth. AI (and more specifically, OpenAI) indeed deserves to be relegated to the echelons of celebrity drama and not the grown-up table of scientific progress. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.