6 ms·

Sam Altman and Dario Amodei are both walking back AI jobs apocalypse predictions

• Analemma_ 4mo ago
  Of course, the fact that the statements they made confidently for years are now hastily getting undone in the face of public backlash only further cements their reputation as snakes who can't be trusted farther than one can throw a bowling ball. For a while there I actually respected Amodei for sticking to his guns on the job loss thing, it seemed like it was his genuinely-held belief and he was going to keep saying the truth even if it was unpopular, but never mind.
  • NateEag 4mo ago
    Is it possible Amodei has revised his opinion after his predictions were empirically proved false? I haven't looked at how long he's been predicting job destruction, so I don't know if that explanation fits the facts.
    • bcrosby95 4mo ago
      As a general rule the least charitable interpretation of a CEO's words are probably the most accurate. Considering the increasing backlash against AI this sounds more like a PR move than a change in actual belief.
      • 2fer 4mo ago
        Their identity in regards to history is centered on destroying jobs. So they will never let that go. Its gonna be funny seeing the eventual ego melt down when the labour market continues going on.
• papichulo2023 4mo ago
  It is kinda funny the irony of going from "we are going to replace devs" to "we <3 devs, keep burning those tokens"
  • zuzululu 4mo ago
    I don't think its as big of a deal as its made out to be. They are human after all and have overestimated the capabilities of LLMs. What's more important is that this signals product market fit.
    • winfredJa 4mo ago
      They are backpedaling because AI backlash is slowing down their data center builds.
      • iwontberude 4mo ago
        Millions of Nvidia GPUs are stranded in warehouses right now with nowhere to be installed and some will be deprecated in less than a year. Good thing Micron and everyone in the supply chain is scaling up to make millions more... I am sure this will work out fine when they write down all of the inventory which is too old to install
        • jijijijij 4mo ago
          Are you telling me I only have to wait just a little longer and the GPU are going to be really, really cheap?
          • pbohun 4mo ago
            No, the GPUs used in AI data centers don't have the capability to do normal graphics. They're completely useless for games and content creation. Additionally, B200s can consume up to 14kW of power. There are no consumer power supplies that could power such a thing. The sad thing is all that silicon will basically be worthless.
• dbvn 4mo ago
  the damage is done. Why did they ever think it was a good idea to brag that they were going to destroy all middle/upper class jobs?
  • anthomtb 4mo ago
    To market their product to c-suite people.
  • reducesuffering 4mo ago
    They were being earnest. People can't handle the truth, so now they're doing PR comms.
  • energy123 4mo ago
    Because it helps to raise capital at low costs if your investors and creditors think you're going to replace all labor.
    • 2fer 4mo ago
      [flagged]
  • dyauspitr 4mo ago
    Because that was the truth. Now they have learned they are going to have to lie to the people so the masses can be sleepwalked to the same eventuality.
    • solumunus 4mo ago
      I suppose we’ll see.
  • vrganj 4mo ago
    Class blindness. Their buddies all love the idea of showing pesky workers their place.
  • deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
• blitzar 4mo ago
  They won't be trillionaires with that attitude. They could have kept saying the line "Ai will replace all the jobs by the end of the year" for another 20 years.
  • iammjm 4mo ago
    That’s the Elon Musk spirit!
    • postalrat 4mo ago
      Well that is the goal!
    • analogpixel 4mo ago
      These Ai's will be full self driving next year.
      • warumdarum 4mo ago
        These Ai's will be fools self driving next year. I see what your dialect did there. Can i quote you verbatim?
      • bfkwlfkjf 4mo ago
        These Ais can drive from a parking lot in new York to a parking lot in California now
        • analogpixel 4mo ago
          through the tunnel bored from New York to California.
      • Goofy_Coyote 4mo ago
        These Ais don't even need to arrive. They just are there. Always. Everywhere.
      • kingleopold 4mo ago
• CodeCompost 4mo ago
  I have to admit LLMs are actually quite useful at generating code for me, but I am experienced enough to know what I want. I use it as a next-generation autocomplete.
  • elliotec 4mo ago
    This is the "whole thing" in a nutshell for me too. It's useful, speeds some things up, but I've been doing this a long time. The state-of-the-art or medium-term future of the tooling doesn't feel apocalyptic in itself, but the macro forces, implications of scaling, and general reactions to it on all sides are a different story.
    • tills13 4mo ago
      It's apocalyptic to the people who previously clocked in, did mediocre work, and clocked out. For those of us willing to put in a little effort, it's just another tool. Though I think there's still a disconnect at the managerial level where they think firing half the team and giving the rest AI is going to 10x revenue.
• okasaki 4mo ago
  The scam was that the US needed private industry to bootstrap technology that's mostly going to be used for surveillance analysis and building kill matrices.
  • josefritzishere 4mo ago
    That's very real https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix
• booleandilemma 4mo ago
  CEOs aren't a big enough target market. They need their slop machines to appeal to the masses as well. I wouldn't be surprised if we started seeing more advertising with that in mind, something like the ads Apple has but marketing their AI.
• hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 4mo ago
  Saying people are going to lose jobs at least sounded like we were at the cusp of something special. Now it just seems like we are going to get Opus 4.8.1 that supposedly helps somehow according to benchmarks. Guess they have found their market and this is it.
• 0xbadcafebee 4mo ago
  To recap: 1) they developed and heavily pushed a technology they thought would result in mass unemployment, 2) they now believe they are wrong, so the market/government should definitely support their company going public. Which means that they were both intending to tank the economy and take your job away, and they were also wrong in their predictions, and now want to be rewarded for both with more money.
  • datakan 4mo ago
    It's almost like their business model was written by ChatGPT back when it was telling people to put rocks on pizza
  • ncr100 4mo ago
    Kind of tells me something about Money, that these are some of the richest people on the planet. I'm not sure what exactly .. but throwing any random idea against the wall and seeing what sticks, ethics be damned, seems to be the common thread.
• tunesmith 4mo ago
  Unfortunately it will take longer for our bosses to walk it back. I feel like I'm fighting the battle daily, telling execs what kind of work LLMs do not replace... it's very slippery, they keep on doing the rhetorical texas two-step - I don't think they even realize they're doing it. We communicate that LLM is amplifying, they hear it can replace. "No, we need humans to help with specs" "But AI can help with that." "But only help, they can't come up with the idea." "Sure they can, we can just ask them." It's also amazing how hidden some of these realities were before. Like, you assign a ticket to a developer - in the past they just wanted to know the developer was working on it and didn't care so much which work was what. They'd probably be so surprised to find out that a large percentage of implementation was deriving exactly what was meant by the jira ticket or the specification or the product person's intent. Which is all the stuff you have to work on before you can type in a prompt to an LLM. But now there's this pressure to believe that the developers only do the implementation part that the LLMs do, so they can pretend there will be major efficiency improvements. And it's really hard to explain to them what it is that developers even do. I know I'm not saying anything new here, but at least where I'm working all of these matters feel much more present than they did months ago.
  • datakan 4mo ago
    It tells you a lot about your execs and how little they care, either for their employees or their customers. The quarterly profits are their God and they will worship at the altar of the stock price. Instead of finding ways to make AI enhance their employees and make them more productive, they immediately jump to ways to eliminate employees. It's the opposite of a growth mentallity. I'd love for these executives to show me a time when investing in people was the wrong choice. I've never seen a company punished for doing the right thing, caring for humans and providing a good work environment. This suicidal tendency in the corporate world to constantly decimate your workforce every cycle is just mind boggling and the fact the stock market responds to it so positively is horrifying.
    • andy99 4mo ago
      I've never seen a company punished for doing the right thing, caring for humans and providing a good work environment. We’ll see how this goes over but I disagree. You don’t have to look hard in tech, especially a few years ago, to find groups of coddled “workers”, doing very little or at least doing what they want instead of what a business and customers want. This paradoxically ended up creating toxic work environments, and making it impossible to actually get work out of people. We’re seeing a correction now.
• halamadrid 4mo ago
  They both hired some good publicists who is advising that change your tone and messaging to get the public to like and trust the companies. Initially the goal was to convince investors which is pretty much done and now its the retail/public that will value these companies once they IPO. Either way the job market is definitely impacted and is changing rapidly. Will one of these companies be the first to hit 10 trillion valuation?
• simonw 4mo ago
  OK, this is weird. The article says: > OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, in an interview with Commonwealth Bank of Australia CEO Matt Comyn on Tuesday, said he was “pretty wrong” about AI’s economic impact—a reversal from his June 2025 warnings that entry-level roles were at serious risk. But the link to the interview goes to this 2m11s YouTube video, and he doesn't use say anything of the sort: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAhbsKZ-_bg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAhbsKZ-_bg Here's a full MacWhisper transcript (easier to search than the YouTube one): https://gist.github.com/simonw/ba0fe174cb7306b74ddf08589a027a3f https://gist.github.com/simonw/ba0fe174cb7306b74ddf08589a027... UPDATE: It turns out the article was linking to a short highlights video, but the interview itself was 45 minutes long. I don't think the full video is available anywhere, so it's hard to confirm that "pretty wrong" quote. This Reuters story carries the same quotes and, unlike the linked Fortune article, doesn't sit behind a paywall: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/openais-altman-says-ai-unlikely-lead-jobs-apocalypse-2026-05-26/ https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/openais-altman-sa...
  • foolswisdom 4mo ago
    There's a partial corresponding quote at https://www.commbank.com.au/articles/newsroom/2026/05/sam-altman-close-ai-gap.html https://www.commbank.com.au/articles/newsroom/2026/05/sam-al....
    • simonw 4mo ago
      That's a better link, thanks. Not much substance there about this though! > One of the areas where he personally had been wide of the mark was on AI’s short-term impact on entry-level white-collar jobs, which had not been nearly as bad as he had once predicted, he said. “I’m delighted to be wrong about that.” I'm not sure that justifies a whole "Sam Altman ... walking back AI jobs apocalypse predictions" headline, personally. It's pretty thin. But... we still haven't seen the full interview, so there might be more to it. The Fortune article also includes: > Altman added that he’s taken a lot of flack for his hype, but better safe than sorry.”People are like, ‘Oh you could have saved the world a lot of fear mongering and a lot of doom and gloom’ but at the time I was like, ‘I see this is a real risk we should probably talk about it.’ and it still may.”
• b0sk 4mo ago
  This feels orchestrated (someone made a phone call to them). Look at this a16z tweet : https://x.com/a16z/status/2059687657840713925?s=20 https://x.com/a16z/status/2059687657840713925?s=20
  • treis 4mo ago
    That is one confusing chart
  • throwaway613746 4mo ago
    [dead]
• 66yatman 4mo ago
  Are there grounds for we to get sue? Please let me know.
• metalliqaz 4mo ago
  Public sentiment has turned strongly against them. They can try to take it back, but I don't think they will be successful. Nobody is buying the fiction anymore. Everyone knows that any proceeds from the technology will not be shared. The ownership class will take everything and leave the ecological impact to be dealt with by the same people they laid off.
• guestbest 4mo ago
  In every AI prediction there is an obvious underestimating of the actual difficulties faced by workers and planners so the tool to automate those intelligent tasks always way underperform what a person is capable of with the notable exception of merging the automation with human tasks as an augment. And that is a totally ‘nother topic. But thanks for the investment money.
• basseq 4mo ago
  [flagged]
• simonw 4mo ago
  Fortune articles are behind a paywall, which makes them a bad fit for Hacker News. This Reuters story carries a similar idea: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/openais-altman-says-ai-unlikely-lead-jobs-apocalypse-2026-05-26/ https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/openais-altman-sa... I'd warn that this all looks pretty thin - there are a couple of partially supporting quotes from a 45 minute virtual conversation Sam had with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) conference on Tuesday, but they don't look strong enough to me support the "walking back AI jobs apocalypse" framing. See also this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48315157 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48315157
  • spprashant 4mo ago
    I agree. With Altman at least it seems he is making the pivot because he thinks its better messaging. Amodei is just re-framing what he actually sees as the endgame here. He says 10x productivity, he means 10x less jobs.
    • simonw 4mo ago
      I would hope that if Sam was making a deliberate pivot here he might use a slightly bigger platform to do so than a conversation with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia conference.
      • spprashant 4mo ago
        [dead]
• aresant 4mo ago
  This is an absolutely classic PR "submarine" effort to reframe the impact of AI Paul Graham has mandatory essay on this - https://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html https://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html (1) More than 50% of Americans at this point are more concerned about AI than excited for it - https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/03/12/key-findings-about-how-americans-view-artificial-intelligence/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/03/12/key-findi... (2) Popular media is feeding into this zeitgeist with headlines like - "Prepare for an AI jobs apocalypse" eg - https://www.economist.com/leaders/2026/05/14/prepare-for-an-ai-jobs-apocalypse https://www.economist.com/leaders/2026/05/14/prepare-for-an-... (3) There is a bright line between these articles and growing concern / pushback on the development of new data centers with both moratoriums and significant municipal cancellations. (4) Perhaps more materially the architects of AI are being challenged directly - in April Sam Altman's home was (a) bombed and then (b) shot at and weeks later the entire industry was just taken to task by The Pope! himself calling for acknowledgement of human limitation, grace, and dignity. (5) Meanwhile Sam and others are reframing including launching a new foundation to "increase quality of life and individual freedoms for people around the world" and pivoting messaging to AI "accelerating everyone in achieving their goals" https://x.com/sama/status/2059677202917331431 https://x.com/sama/status/2059677202917331431 & https://x.com/sama/status/2057218997503086888 https://x.com/sama/status/2057218997503086888 Is this because the architects don't believe AI will be as disruptive as planned or . . . ?
  • margalabargala 4mo ago
    It'll be disruptive, but not apocalyptic. Some classes of jobs common today will be eliminated, while more will grow. Overall productivity will increase, but it'll suck for the people made obsolete. Certainly it will not result in most people working fewer hours. Source: see the adoption of computers/databases across previously pen-and-paper industries 50 years ago. That was more disruptive than this will be.
  • watwut 4mo ago
    The most maddening thing is that in our current timeline, the more obviously you lie and bullshit, the more you get rewarded. And winners can lie and bullshit with even less pushback, creating deadly cycle.
• AlexandrB 4mo ago
  So in the span of 2 years we've gone from "AI will be our new God and solve all of our problems" to "AI will replace all your jobs and make SaaS companies obsolete", to now "AI will have some impact on the job market - might be positive, might be negative - who can say?" I'm filing this right next to "blockchain for everything" and "we will all live in the metaverse" as evidence that most of these people are full of shit and don't understand much outside of their area of expertise (if they even understand that). I can't believe the level of credulous hype around this stuff. At least AI is a useful technology compared to what we saw with "The Metaverse".
  • 2dfds 4mo ago
    " as evidence that most of these people are full of shit and don't understand much outside of their area of expertise " Its interesting isnt it? That many humans dont seem to understand that unless you know a thing well, perhaps you should shut up and not comment. How can Dario and Sam credibly say we are going to automate X, Y, Z job when they've never done it in their lives? Its like the idiots on here talking down on accountants - unless you've done the job and prove you understand the mechanics: shush. Dont talk about stuff you have zero clue about. I see this time and time again in posts related to finance - just shut up and stop creating noise.
  • deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
• mustaphah 4mo ago
  Sam Altman and other big figures tend to shape their narratives around their personal and organizational interests. When people were skeptical, they pushed hard into the "God-like AI" narrative. Now that safety concerns are growing and their growth plans are in danger, they're pushing back against what they used to advocate. Even if they genuinely believe what they’re saying, their perspective is still fundamentally biased and should always be taken with a healthy grain of salt.
  • customguy 4mo ago
    I think they just say shit. And then they say the exact opposite shit, without blinking. Maybe that's why they confuse next token prediction with thought, not to ennoble "AI", but to absolve themselves.
• _23sd 4mo ago
  Implicit in a lot of "AI jobs apocalypse" predictions is the assumption that most tasks are ridiculously easy compared to AI research, so naturally the smart AI researchers can understand any profession well enough to credibly predict that AI will be able to replace it. I'm personally not sure the apocalypse has been truly disproven as opposed to progress just being slower than some of the overexuberant predictions, but there does seem to be a pattern of famous AI researchers predicting a job would be automated and turning out to be wrong because they focused too hard on a single aspect of it that could be automated while handwaving or ignoring the hard parts. This has prominently happened with radiology, then with customer service, and now they are walking back on programming too. Maybe take these guys with a grain of salt going forward? I trust them to be able to tell us frontier AI models will keep getting better, not to predict the impact that will have on specific industries. Some people will insist we should give them half credit for predicting there would be impact at all (as opposed to the "it's a bubble" refrain) but I think it should be possible to ignore two categories of obviously dumb predictions at the same time.
  • zozbot234 4mo ago
    Programming has been successfully automated though. Programmers used to write programs line-by-line in raw binary code or assembly mnemonics, now they just write high-level formal code in languages like C++ or Rust and the computer spends much of its working time processing those lexer and parser 'tokens' and translating the whole thing into assembly and binary code. It all works quite well.
    • gyomu 4mo ago
      Before: - programmers spend time in meetings discussing requirements - programmers spend time thinking how to improve performance and reliability - programmers spend time tracking down issues in existing code - programmers write binary/assembler code Now: - programmers spend time in meetings discussing requirements - programmers spend time thinking how to improve performance and reliability - programmers spend time tracking down issues in existing code - programmers write C++/Rust code Pray tell, where do you see the “programming has been successfully automated” part?
• gxs 4mo ago
  One of the things missed with AI is that it’s enabled people to do more - either by augmenting skill sets or augmenting bandwidth In my own circles this has led to more work not less Expectations are higher, SLAs are tighter. Which makes sense - if a company can mine more gold with less works, they aren’t going to retire workers they will ask for even more gold Managers are coding again, analysts are expected to write better requirements and do more of their own analytics, lots of worn all around Eventually we will saturate that and need new people again I don’t disagree with the general principle that people will lose jobs, I just a) don’t think it will be as accelerated as people claim and b) more obviously the disruption will be felt in roles that are more rote and mechanical in nature - e.g. peoples whose job is in the family of summarizing data or compiling metrics, generating simple content (slide decks), etc and slowly creep up from there AI is one of those garbage in garbage out things and so far the quality out when the input quality has been great from what I’ve seen. Just a note preemptively to the nay sayers
  • watwut 4mo ago
    It does not make sense. If you have tool that makes you more productive and somehow end up overworked, it is not because of the tool. It is deliberate decision of the management. More productivity could mean more earning for the company. It could mean people getting kind of bored as work dries out. What you describe is normal push beyond possible with predictable longer term results.
    • gxs 4mo ago
      Yeah I purposely didn’t get into the right or not - it’s just how I’m seeing things evolve in “real time” A big part of it is that people feel like they are drinking from a firehouse having to learn to use ai (which is not always just a prompt) and having to leverage it effectively at the same time for real product/business work I suspect this will settle down at some point too One other observation I’ve seen: the makeup of a team that can leverage ai is turning out to be different than the make up of the usual high performing Eng team we think about
• atleastoptimal 4mo ago
  Are they walking back their PR or their actual beliefs? I think they realize that even if AI takes all jobs, the process to getting there will be less turbulent if they obfuscate and minimize it, until the working class no longer has leverage, rather than sounding the alarm earlier, leading to a more concerted populist uprising, and then AI is regulated far more than they want
  • overfeed 4mo ago
    They are walking back old PR with updated PR
• Sol- 4mo ago
  Kind of a let down if that were to mean that they are bearish on super intelligence.
• MagicMoonlight 4mo ago
  AI lets me be far more productive, creating far more demand. Before I wouldn’t have made half the stuff I’ve made, because it was too time consuming. The lowered opportunity cost has led to me having more to do. It doesn’t have this effect for morons. If you don’t know what you’re doing, you can easily slop out some garbage, but you won’t be able to iterate on it or maintain it. These models will produce some really stupid outputs unless you actively fight them. Then if you try and add something new, you’re slapping new layers of slop onto the stinking pile. I’m not concerned about losing my job with these current slop models. Most employees can barely read and write, they aren’t suddenly going to produce entire systems just because they can slop stuff out.
• fletchowns 4mo ago
  > then began responding to come again manually Presumably they meant to write "to some again manually". On the one hand I'm kind of surprised when typos make it into major publications these days. Now, it's kind of a reassuring sign that an article was written and reviewed by humans though.
• yalogin 4mo ago
  They are walking it back because they realized they don’t have anything to gain by it at this point. Previously they could get market attention and employer attention to increase their revenue and now that part is done. Their pipelines are full and the employer mindshare is obtained. They can pivot back is what they figured out
• guluarte 4mo ago
  I don't know if anyone else feels the same but for me, the more productive LLMs become, the more work I have.
  • _bypa 4mo ago
    That's why executives are pushing for LLMs everywhere in businesses: to ensure the floor goes up for everyone. A few productive stars who don't alter the expectations baseline for everyone. That way, all need to work harder, so the execs get to pocket the benefits. Whether AI actually makes people more productive is irrelevant: you just declare that people need to do more for the same amount of money and in the same amount of time, and employees have to scramble. Just dangle that carrot a little further out so the donkeys work harder.
  • uejfiweun 4mo ago
    Yeah, absolutely. I feel like we've replaced "deep work" with constant context switching, breakages, and friction. I got into this line of work in order to go deep and build cool stuff, but now the vast majority of my day-to-day is spent fighting against interfaces. Couple this with unreasonable expectations from the man and yeah, my dev job is leaving me more exhausted than ever.
• mschuster91 4mo ago
  How about both of them are walked into a prison and we throw the keys away? The amount of suffering these two people (and of course also their fellowship) have caused is absurd and as a society, we should not just let this be swept under the rug. Arrest Sam Altman.
• ViktorRay 4mo ago
  The Industrial Revolution led to a substantial decrease in agricultural jobs for humanity. But ultimately there were new jobs created. This happens with every technological innovation. It’s called creative destruction. The idea that some technology will lead to mass unemployment and then some kind of revolution…that is a myth that’s been around since Marx. Actually even before him. I predict the same thing will happen. Some jobs will go away. Others will take their place. The people of the 1700’s and 1800’s couldn’t have even begun to imagine the kinds of jobs many do today.
  • jplusequalt 4mo ago
    >I predict the same thing will happen. Some jobs will go away. Others will take their place. The people of the 1700’s and 1800’s couldn’t have even begun to imagine the kinds of jobs many do today. What are these jobs? I have seen this same opinion by so many, but nobody can hazard a guess what those jobs are. In the meantime, those whosw careers are caught in the blast radius of AI are putting their hope on hypothetical jobs appearing before their employers decide to replace them. Golly, no wonder people aren't happy!
  • uejfiweun 4mo ago
    Unfortunately, we don't experience creative destruction in abstract terms like reading about it in a history textbook. Most people are really just focused on their own lives. Losing their job AND the economic value of their skills is nothing short of a disaster. I don't think telling them "relax, eventually you'll be able to switch over to entirely new categories of employment!" is really going to strike the chord you're looking for.
  • throwburn202605 4mo ago
    Many jobs today require 3-6 years of training, either degree, deploma, or apprenticeship. There currently isn't the economic incentives in place vs ditching the old guard and hiring new. Previous positions need to go through the process again merely to arrive at the bottom of thebl ladder
• keybored 4mo ago
  Architects of misfortune telling your their maximalist ambitions isn’t bad. It’s a blessing. Now never forget their vile fantasies, even if they shy away from them and talk about giving everyone a little bit of UBI and other such HORSESHIT.
  • shoopadoop 4mo ago
    Musk wants all the money, but at the same time he also says that money is passe and that you don't need to worry about retirement in the upcoming era of Amazing Abundance(TM)
• plaidfuji 4mo ago
  > Altman’s realization was born partially out of an experiment of his own. He tried delegating his Slack and email responses to AI, then began responding to some again manually. Well I’ll be..
• BrenBarn 4mo ago
  Does anyone actually believe that anything these people say has any relationship to reality? As far as I can tell it's 90% just saying whatever they think will make them the most money, with maybe 10% of self-delusion thrown in because their brains are addled by spending all their time in a bubble world where AI is the be-all and the end-all. Maybe AI will cause a jobs apocalypse, maybe it won't, but I sure as hell wouldn't trust anything Sam Altman says on the matter.
• penguin_booze 4mo ago
  The betrayal was more closer to home than CEOs nutting themselves out. Your employer got enamoured with AI. And despite knowing you (or not) what you're capable of, they started shoving AI down your throat. Your job title has effectively been changed to 'AI operator'. White collar jobs, if not fully eliminated, have surely been transformed. White collar workers, who were once pets, have now been turned into cattle.
• Bolin-Weng_666 4mo ago
  [dead]
• SwtCyber 4mo ago
  [flagged]
• zombiefromfo 4mo ago
  Too little, too late. I hope they both go yo jail over all that they have done
• DrScientist 4mo ago
  I think the only certainty here is what Sam Altman chooses to say in public is very much in Sam Altman's interests. So working back from that: - The IPO is the way to convert theoretical riches into real riches. Indeed if OpenAI business model never actually works out it may be the only significant chance. - They want a large retail investor ( driven by hype and not numbers ) component to the IPO to maximise gain. - They fear that the open public hostility to AI and AI companies put's this at risk. - Hence the about face on the messaging. THe first messaging about job reductions was about the value OpenAI could capture - that was aimed at initial investors. Now they want to take money from the general public - so a different message.
  • DrScientist 4mo ago
    I asked OpenAI for comment on the above ( via ChatGPT of course ). The two things it added is that being seen as too disruptive/unpopular creates regulatory risk which could impact future growth and profits, and also secondary reputation risk for investors both which might impact the IPO.
• classified 4mo ago
  "Sorry, we lied to you to make more money. Now that we got it, we want you to like us again."
• tripleee 4mo ago
  nothing these people say has any relation to reality. It's all marketing
• masterleopold 4mo ago
  [flagged]