murakamiiq84

5 ms·

1.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Same, but some animals are more equal than others. I'd personally trust one of those Japanese companies that lasted hundreds of years more on questions like stability and carefulness, compared to a flash-in-the-pan SV startup that&#x27
2.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
And also how a board of academics + Adam + Ilya of a nonprofit ostensibly optimizing for "humanity" might not consider someone like that the best fit for representing the nonprofit, especially if he was gaslighting them and treati
3.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Right, it depends on the details of his firing, like was it more about Altman being spread too thin or if it was more about ethics.
4.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
My story: Maybe they had lofty goals, maybe not, but it sounded like the whole thing was instigated by Altman trying to fire Toner (one of the board members) over a silly pretext of her coauthoring a paper that nobody read that was very mil
5.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
I think it was only a competitor app after GPTs came out. A conspiracy theorist might say that Altman wanted to get him off the board and engineered GPTs as a pretext first, in the same way that he used some random paper coauthored by Ton
6.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
I think it's important to keep in mind that BOTH Altman and the board maneuvered to threaten to destroy OpenAI. If Altman was silent and/or said something like "people take some time off for Thanksgiving, in a week calmer min
7.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Actually I think Bill would be a pretty good candidate. Smart, mature, good at first principles reasoning, deeply understands both the tech world and the nonprofit world, is a tech person who's not socially networked with the existing
8.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
I couldn't find any source on her investing in any AI companies. If it's true (and not hidden), I'm really surprised that major news publications aren't covering it.
9.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Wait what? She invested in a competitor? Do you have a source?
10.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
I guess Metz would have a lot of sympathy for someone drawing the heat of the entire internet, and even powerful VCs, by doing something that many people think is destructive "on principle".
11.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Random fanfiction: it's also possible that it wasn't actually a 3-3 split but more like a 2-2 split with 2 people -- likely Adam and Ilya, though I guess Adam and Tasha is also possible -- trying to play nice and not obviously &qu
12.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
I read it as a commitment to keep this costly signal, beyond just words. If an amoral oil company wants to keep employees/customers who care about the environment, they might both say that they care about the environment AND do costly
13.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Is this even true for for-profit companies? Like if a professor is on the board of a for-profit (which I think is pretty common for deeptech? Maybe companies in general too? https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/
14.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
She has a legally binding charter (well, assuming OpenAI's charter actually holds up in court, which we may end up seeing as the next logical step in the drama) to use board powers to further the non-profit mission. She does not have a
15.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Yeah it sounded like 3-3 gridlock until someone flipped, either it was Sam/Greg/Ilya against Adam/Helen/Tasha or it was Sam/Greg/Adam against Ilya/Helen/Tasha.
16.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Note that the quote about Anthropic is about Anthropic's desire to be perceived as a company that values safety , not a direct claim that Anthropic actually is safe, or even that it desires to value safety.
17.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
I think this is heavily editoralized. if you look at the 3 pages in question that the quotes are pulled from (28-30 in doc, 29-31 in pdf), they appear to be given as examples in pretty boring academic discussions explicating the theories of
18.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
https://twitter.com/willknight/status/1726793735143621058 This guy claims he has "reason" to believe it's a "complete fabrication." No idea whether to trust this guy or his source more tha
19.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Apparently Hoffman was kicked out by Sam, not just Musk: https://www.semafor.com/article/11/19/2023/reid-hoffman-was-... Maybe the remaining board members could see the writing on the wall and wanted to
20.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Unfortunately lawyers almost always tell you to be quiet, even when you should be talking. So in this case listening to legal advice might have screwed them over, ultimately.
21.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Might be more for PR/regulatory capture/SF cause du jour reasons than the "prepare for later versions that might start killing people, or assist terrorists" reasons. Like one version of the story you could tell is that t
22.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Yeah even though I agree with the COI being a large concern and potentially a justifiable reason for firing him (especially if coupled with other instances of him withholding key information from the board), it's clear that the non-pro
23.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
The claim is that he's starting different AI hardware companies on the side, not that he's doing it under OpenAI's umbrella. It's more like if Sundar tried to get funding for some side hustles while talking with potentia
24.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Yeah something can be potentially net good for a company but still be a COI. If I'm in charge of awarding military contracts and I give it to a armaments company my son is a VP of, and I didn't disclose to anybody that my son was
25.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
Come on, I think it's really obvious that the largest AI nonprofit in the world might be interested in chips, to a much larger degree than a typical nonprofit would be interested in cafeteria food. I think the analogy is more like some
26.
by murakamiiq84 3y ago
I thought non-competes are not legally enforceable in the state of California anyway.