5 ms·

@pg on @sama: "you could parachute him into an island full of cannibals and come back in 5 years and he'd be the king." In retrospect this quote comes across a

by hendzen 7mo ago

@pg on @sama: "you could parachute him into an island full of cannibals and come back in 5 years and he'd be the king." In retrospect this quote comes across as way more foreboding given what we've learned about the scale of his ambitions and his willingness to lie and bend reality to gain power. Dario on the other hand seems to have an integrity that's particularly rare in this era. I hope he remains strong in the face of the regime.

beepbooptheory 7mo ago
In retrospect?
ProofHouse 7mo ago
Don't be fooled. Dario's 'awe shucks, me' routine and 'but, but, but' is not all that is looks to be on surface.
phendrenad2 7mo ago
pg's sama praise bewilders me. Is there some other Sam Altman he's talking about? > Graham was immediately impressed by Altman, later recalling that meeting the 19-year-old felt like what it must have been like to talk to Bill Gates at the same age. He noted Altman's intense "force of will" from their early interactions. Is there a Gates-like "presence" or a "force of will" displayed in his public interviews?
- sethops1 7mo ago
  The only vibe I get from Altman is that he's a weasel, willing to say anything or burn whatever to get what he wants.
- neya 7mo ago
  Given Gates' current reputation, I don't think this aged well.
  - gadders 7mo ago
    Especially if you ask Altman's sister (allegedly)
- username223 7mo ago
  > pg's sama praise bewilders me. Is there some other Sam Altman he's talking about? Paul Graham was a pudgy mediocrity clever enough to capitalize on nerds' obsession with Lisp, and leverage it into f-you money. Game recognized game in the shape of Sam Altman.
  - DaedalusII 7mo ago
    yeah man what a mediocre loser all he did was create the first cloud based ecommerce platform , sell it to yahoo for $49m in the 90s, then co-found the most successful early stage VC firm of all time, which made THIS forum which you are using to attack him lol
- DaedalusII 7mo ago
  its reasonable praise. a 19 year old social outcast who grew up in the midwest drops out of ivy league and starts a company before smartphones exist that he sells for $43 million dollars at age 27, then invested almost all the money into more startups, became a billionaire, and hijacked chatgpt from the richest person in the world. its not a comment on his ethics or morality
skeptic_ai 7mo ago
So mass surveillance on non us citizens is having integrity?
asveikau 7mo ago
I think I'm a bit more of an iconoclast than the average HN reader, but when this community was fawning over him when he was head of YC, I always got the impression, without knowing the guy or much about him, that it was totally undeserved. Mainly because thoughtless fawning of any kind makes me immediately suspicious. Nobody deserves that kind of praise. I read that quote and see no positive interpretation. It was always a negative description. I think maybe this community could use a bit more natural skepticism of hierarchy.
- IncreasePosts 7mo ago
  Same. What sam tried to do on his own, he failed at (not horribly failed, but he certainly wasn't in the same league as zuckerberg or page or gates or musk - he raised at least $30M then was forced to sell a failure of a product for $40M). His ascendancy only came when he basically was given an ulta powerful position by an ultra powerful man.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
nradov 7mo ago
It's always hilarious watching online fights between tech industry billionaires, sort of like the geek version of UFC. The weirdest part is how regular people pick sides and defend their billionaire against the other guy.
- derwiki 7mo ago
  Why is that weird? If we do that for UFC and other sports
  - deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
- neya 7mo ago
  > The weirdest part is how regular people pick sides and defend their billionaire Someone told me in another comment that it's possibly bot activity. I suspect so too, because in a tech forum like HN, a top voted comment can shift the entire focus/narrative of any given issue. I know there are a lot of mods on here to prevent this sort of thing, but given how good LLMs have gotten, I wonder if we are at a point where humans can even discern cases where this a mix of human and AI involvement in online activity (such as commenting).
  - sixothree 7mo ago
    It's not only single comments, but if you surround people in a sea of opinion, they will definitely start swimming in your direction. Thought, that's probably more important on reddit.
    - gottorf 7mo ago
      > that's probably more important on reddit. I don't know if you've noticed, but HN has been full of Reddit-tier comments, most especially around hot-button political topics, for a while now.
      - 7mo ago
neya 7mo ago
>Dario on the other hand seems to have an integrity that's particularly rare in this era. Anthropic actually partnered up with Palantir. They are not the saints you think they are, either. We should stop worshipping people and companies and stop putting them on pedestals. Just because one party is at fault, doesn't mean the other is automatically innocent. These are all for-profit companies at play here. https://investors.palantir.com/news-details/2024/Anthropic-and-Palantir-Partner-to-Bring-Claude-AI-Models-to-AWS-for-U.S.-Government-Intelligence-and-Defense-Operations/ https://investors.palantir.com/news-details/2024/Anthropic-a...
- fmajid 7mo ago
  If you look at his comments about Palantir and their proposed safeguards, it's clear it's a case of "if you are dining with the Devil, you'd better bring a very long spoon"
  - neya 7mo ago
    These comments were after the deal had soured. Not before. If it was a case of such morality, the partnership with Palantir would have never happened in the first place. The contract was explicit - it was for defence purposes with a company known for spying activities. So, obviously spying is involved and they weren't just going to generate cat videos with it. Again, nobody is innocent here.
- dota_fanatic 7mo ago
  I've heard Palantir is essentially the only federal cloud vendor with this administration for secure services. By "partnered up with Palantir", do you mean they provided their models to the government? Or something more?
  - neya 7mo ago
    From the title of the link enclosed: "Anthropic and Palantir Partner to Bring Claude AI Models to AWS for U.S. Government Intelligence and Defense Operations" Keywords: "Government Intelligence"
ting0 7mo ago
[flagged]
- waterproof 7mo ago
  Hmm I know quite a few real people pushing QuitGPT and none of them work for Anthropic.
  - patcon 7mo ago
    same thought. I'm livid and I'm not a bot. I've rarely felt so activated by any western politics
DaedalusII 7mo ago
[flagged]
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
- foltik 7mo ago
  > and they should ignore the government which ostensibly represents the people Barely represents the people. Especially not on the issue of domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous killing machines. Or the war in Vietnam.
  - DaedalusII 7mo ago
    well yeah but should Smith and Wesson just be like man the US Gov doesnt align with our corporate values so we are just gonna start selling belt fed machine guns to civilians absurd yes but same principle. companies have to be subject to government especially in technologies that enable or manage violence. this is because the role of the government is to collectively manage and allocate violence in the manner the people desire
    - foltik 7mo ago
      > companies have to be subject to government especially in technologies that enable or manage violence. this is because the role of the government is to collectively manage and allocate violence in the manner the people desire I don’t know what you’re describing, but it’s not how the US works. Companies aren’t extensions of the state; they’re private actors that have to follow the law. If Congress wants something prohibited, it passes a law. Otherwise firms are free to choose who they do business with.
      - DaedalusII 7mo ago
        agencies create many regulations which affect companies, with no input from congress. the ATF in 2017 banned 'bump stocks' by reclassifying them as machineguns with zero input from congress. companies and the people who work for them are subject to the state via the law and regulations. if they violate the law, the state will use violence to enforce the law, with a government entity called law enforcement and law enforcement officers. if new technologies are invented, like the internet, missiles, nuclear power, and so on, which represent an ability to manage and allocate violence, or remove the state ability to control violence, the government needs to reassert their monopoly on that violence and take control of it. without this monopoly, how will they collect taxes and enforce the law? without the monopoly on violence the government is little more than an idea
arduanika 7mo ago
> be the king Which of these two CEOs wants to have an unelected spot in the decision loop of our government? Once I dug into this story, I realized that only one of these companies was attempting a real power grab. Maybe the EAs are doomed to try coup after coup and lose every time. The SCR part is excessive, though, especially if it's interpreted broadly. Altman gets credit for sticking up for Anthropic on that point, but not much credit, because it's so obvious that it's overkill.

by hendzen 7mo ago

beepbooptheory 7mo ago

In retrospect?

ProofHouse 7mo ago

Don't be fooled. Dario's 'awe shucks, me' routine and 'but, but, but' is not all that is looks to be on surface.

phendrenad2 7mo ago

pg's sama praise bewilders me. Is there some other Sam Altman he's talking about? > Graham was immediately impressed by Altman, later recalling that meeting the 19-year-old felt like what it must have been like to talk to Bill Gates at the same age. He noted Altman's intense "force of will" from their early interactions. Is there a Gates-like "presence" or a "force of will" displayed in his public interviews?

sethops1 7mo ago
The only vibe I get from Altman is that he's a weasel, willing to say anything or burn whatever to get what he wants.
neya 7mo ago
Given Gates' current reputation, I don't think this aged well.
- gadders 7mo ago
  Especially if you ask Altman's sister (allegedly)
username223 7mo ago
> pg's sama praise bewilders me. Is there some other Sam Altman he's talking about? Paul Graham was a pudgy mediocrity clever enough to capitalize on nerds' obsession with Lisp, and leverage it into f-you money. Game recognized game in the shape of Sam Altman.
- DaedalusII 7mo ago
  yeah man what a mediocre loser all he did was create the first cloud based ecommerce platform , sell it to yahoo for $49m in the 90s, then co-found the most successful early stage VC firm of all time, which made THIS forum which you are using to attack him lol
DaedalusII 7mo ago
its reasonable praise. a 19 year old social outcast who grew up in the midwest drops out of ivy league and starts a company before smartphones exist that he sells for $43 million dollars at age 27, then invested almost all the money into more startups, became a billionaire, and hijacked chatgpt from the richest person in the world. its not a comment on his ethics or morality

skeptic_ai 7mo ago

So mass surveillance on non us citizens is having integrity?

asveikau 7mo ago

I think I'm a bit more of an iconoclast than the average HN reader, but when this community was fawning over him when he was head of YC, I always got the impression, without knowing the guy or much about him, that it was totally undeserved. Mainly because thoughtless fawning of any kind makes me immediately suspicious. Nobody deserves that kind of praise. I read that quote and see no positive interpretation. It was always a negative description. I think maybe this community could use a bit more natural skepticism of hierarchy.

IncreasePosts 7mo ago
Same. What sam tried to do on his own, he failed at (not horribly failed, but he certainly wasn't in the same league as zuckerberg or page or gates or musk - he raised at least $30M then was forced to sell a failure of a product for $40M). His ascendancy only came when he basically was given an ulta powerful position by an ultra powerful man.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]

nradov 7mo ago

It's always hilarious watching online fights between tech industry billionaires, sort of like the geek version of UFC. The weirdest part is how regular people pick sides and defend their billionaire against the other guy.

derwiki 7mo ago
Why is that weird? If we do that for UFC and other sports
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
neya 7mo ago
> The weirdest part is how regular people pick sides and defend their billionaire Someone told me in another comment that it's possibly bot activity. I suspect so too, because in a tech forum like HN, a top voted comment can shift the entire focus/narrative of any given issue. I know there are a lot of mods on here to prevent this sort of thing, but given how good LLMs have gotten, I wonder if we are at a point where humans can even discern cases where this a mix of human and AI involvement in online activity (such as commenting).
- sixothree 7mo ago
  It's not only single comments, but if you surround people in a sea of opinion, they will definitely start swimming in your direction. Thought, that's probably more important on reddit.
  - gottorf 7mo ago
    > that's probably more important on reddit. I don't know if you've noticed, but HN has been full of Reddit-tier comments, most especially around hot-button political topics, for a while now.
    - 7mo ago

neya 7mo ago

>Dario on the other hand seems to have an integrity that's particularly rare in this era. Anthropic actually partnered up with Palantir. They are not the saints you think they are, either. We should stop worshipping people and companies and stop putting them on pedestals. Just because one party is at fault, doesn't mean the other is automatically innocent. These are all for-profit companies at play here. https://investors.palantir.com/news-details/2024/Anthropic-and-Palantir-Partner-to-Bring-Claude-AI-Models-to-AWS-for-U.S.-Government-Intelligence-and-Defense-Operations/ https://investors.palantir.com/news-details/2024/Anthropic-a...

fmajid 7mo ago
If you look at his comments about Palantir and their proposed safeguards, it's clear it's a case of "if you are dining with the Devil, you'd better bring a very long spoon"
- neya 7mo ago
  These comments were after the deal had soured. Not before. If it was a case of such morality, the partnership with Palantir would have never happened in the first place. The contract was explicit - it was for defence purposes with a company known for spying activities. So, obviously spying is involved and they weren't just going to generate cat videos with it. Again, nobody is innocent here.
dota_fanatic 7mo ago
I've heard Palantir is essentially the only federal cloud vendor with this administration for secure services. By "partnered up with Palantir", do you mean they provided their models to the government? Or something more?
- neya 7mo ago
  From the title of the link enclosed: "Anthropic and Palantir Partner to Bring Claude AI Models to AWS for U.S. Government Intelligence and Defense Operations" Keywords: "Government Intelligence"

ting0 7mo ago

[flagged]

waterproof 7mo ago
Hmm I know quite a few real people pushing QuitGPT and none of them work for Anthropic.
- patcon 7mo ago
  same thought. I'm livid and I'm not a bot. I've rarely felt so activated by any western politics

DaedalusII 7mo ago

[flagged]

deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
foltik 7mo ago
> and they should ignore the government which ostensibly represents the people Barely represents the people. Especially not on the issue of domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous killing machines. Or the war in Vietnam.
- DaedalusII 7mo ago
  well yeah but should Smith and Wesson just be like man the US Gov doesnt align with our corporate values so we are just gonna start selling belt fed machine guns to civilians absurd yes but same principle. companies have to be subject to government especially in technologies that enable or manage violence. this is because the role of the government is to collectively manage and allocate violence in the manner the people desire
  - foltik 7mo ago
    > companies have to be subject to government especially in technologies that enable or manage violence. this is because the role of the government is to collectively manage and allocate violence in the manner the people desire I don’t know what you’re describing, but it’s not how the US works. Companies aren’t extensions of the state; they’re private actors that have to follow the law. If Congress wants something prohibited, it passes a law. Otherwise firms are free to choose who they do business with.
    - DaedalusII 7mo ago
      agencies create many regulations which affect companies, with no input from congress. the ATF in 2017 banned 'bump stocks' by reclassifying them as machineguns with zero input from congress. companies and the people who work for them are subject to the state via the law and regulations. if they violate the law, the state will use violence to enforce the law, with a government entity called law enforcement and law enforcement officers. if new technologies are invented, like the internet, missiles, nuclear power, and so on, which represent an ability to manage and allocate violence, or remove the state ability to control violence, the government needs to reassert their monopoly on that violence and take control of it. without this monopoly, how will they collect taxes and enforce the law? without the monopoly on violence the government is little more than an idea

arduanika 7mo ago

> be the king Which of these two CEOs wants to have an unelected spot in the decision loop of our government? Once I dug into this story, I realized that only one of these companies was attempting a real power grab. Maybe the EAs are doomed to try coup after coup and lose every time. The SCR part is excessive, though, especially if it's interpreted broadly. Altman gets credit for sticking up for Anthropic on that point, but not much credit, because it's so obvious that it's overkill.