4 ms·
My opinion after hearing him on multiple interviews is that he always just says various generalities, he can be talking for 5 minutes and never say anything, a
by drexlspivey 2y ago
My opinion after hearing him on multiple interviews is that he always just says various generalities, he can be talking for 5 minutes and never say anything, all noise. I don't know if he is under an NDA and can't say literally anything about OpenAI and the future or if it's just the way he talks.
- mrweasel 2y agoMaybe he doesn't actually know anything?
- maxwell 2y agoBut he has such force of will.
- ben_w 2y agoThat would be my bet. He's a CEO, I've not once heard it suggested that he's also a researcher (though according to Wikipedia he's a Stanford CompSci dropout). Quite rare to be competent at both CEO-things and the stuff you're hiring people to do.
- disqard 2y agoA Stanford dropout? He must be hot stuff, like Elizabeth Holmes... oops, wrong example.
- akomtu 2y agoPerhaps he uses an earpiece connected to an LLM.
- surfingdino 2y agoI had the same revelation when I read the transcript of one of his interviews with Lex. I found it to be so free of detail or substance that I wanted to make sure it wasn't just a one case of him having a bad day, but reading transcripts of a couple of more interviews confirmed my suspicion that he has nothing of substance to say.
- shafyy 2y agoThat's all of Lex's interviews.
- Vecr 2y agoNo it's not, for example Yudkowsky gives his standard talk on there. I think it matters if the guest has something ready to go for the allotted time.
- nirav72 2y agoYodkowsky shouldn’t be taken seriously. Especially after him saying that any person or country working on banned AI research should have their data centers destroyed via an airstrike.
- beeflet 2y agoCan you make a case against this? It seems plausible to me that AI could be used as a weapon of mass destruction
- FactKnower69 2y agoamericans unironically trying to justify air strikes using the phrase "weapon of mass destruction" in 2024 -- to describe a fucking computer program, no less -- is so far beyond parody wonder if this guy considers stuxnet a wmd
- beeflet 2y agoI think people should generally be allowed to own weapons and general purpose computers, I don't think anyone has a right to build a doomsday device in their garage. If it is impossible to reconcile these, then freedom will be impossible. The only long-term solution is to develop "anti-doomsday" technology. If you have a massive warehouse to train an AI that, IDK folds proteins to develop a bioweapon or something, then you should not expect everyone else to sit on their hands while you plan to hold the entire world hostage. Stuxnet was a program that targeted specifically SCADA controllers used in uranium enrichment facilities. It is not a doomsday device, it is a targeted counter-doomsday device. And while the USA has an imperfect track record with respect to "WMD"s/Proliferation, stuxnet is something that I approve of as an american.