Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 985 posts

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#781

Post by Obscurity4340 »

iteratethis wrote: post #705

I wish we could all just admit that this is a capital run, rather than some moralistic crusade. The employees want to get their big payday, so will follow Altman wherever he goes. Which is the smart thing to do anyway as he runs half the valley. The public discourse in which Sam is the hero is further cemented by the tech ecosystem, which nowadays is circling around AI. Those in the "OpenAI wrapper" game. Nobody has…

I genuinely believe, based on my experiences with ChatGPT, that it doesn't seem all that threatening or dangerous. I get we're in the part of the movie at the start before shit goes down but I just don't see all the fuss. I feel like it has enormous potential in terms of therapy and having "someone" to talk to that you can bounce ideas off and maybe can help gently correct you or prod you in the right direction.

A lot of people can't afford therapy but if ChatGPT can help you identify more elementary problematic patterns of language or behavior as articulated through language and in reference to a knowledgebase for particular modalities like CBT, DBT, or IFS, it help you to "self-correct" and be able to practice as much and as often with guidance as you want for basically free.

That's the part I'm interested in and I always will see that as the big potential.

Please take care, everyone, and be kind. Its a process and a destination and I believe people can come to learn to love both and engage in a way that is rich with opportunity for deep and real restoration/healing. The kind of opportunity that is always available and freely takes in anyone and everyone

Edit: I can access all the therapy I can eat but I just don't find it generally helpful or useful. I like ChatGPT because it can help practice effective stuff like CBT/DBT/IFS and I know how to work around any confabulation because I'm using a text that I can reference

Edit: the biggest threat ChatGPT poses in my view is the loss of income for people. I don't give a flying fuck about "jobs" per se, I care that people are able to have enough and be ok. If we can deal with the selfish folks who will otherwise (as always) attempt to further absorb more of the pie of which they already have a substantial+sufficient portion, they will need to be made to share or they will need a timeout until they can be fair or to go away entirely. Enough is enough, nobody needs excess until everyone has sufficiency, after that, they can have and do as they please unless they are hurting others. That must stop

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#782

Post by DalasNoin »

stavros wrote: post #717
DalasNoin wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you find this so surprising? You make it sound as if OpenAI is already outrageously safety focused. I have talked to a few people from anthropic and they seem to believe that OpenAI doesn't care at all about safety.

Because GPT-4 is already pretty neutered, to the point where it removes a lot of its usefulness.

It is unfortunate that some people hear AI safety and think about chatbots saying mean stuff, and others think about a future system performing the machine revolution against humanity.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#783

Post by wintogreen74 »

chii wrote: post #734
nprateem wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In favour of the CEO who was about to make them fabulously wealthy. FTFY.

and there aint nothing wrong with wanting to be fabulously wealthy.

of course not, but at least have the decency to admit it - don't hide behind some righteous flag of loyalty and caring.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#784

Post by baumy »

righthand wrote: post #765
baumy wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be using a definition of "AI safety believer" that you've reasoned and arrived at yourself. It seems like a reasonable definition and I personally agree with it - the best path to maximal social good is for the ability to build and run these models to be as open and public as possible. I think the "AI safety believers" actually sitting on the board of OpenAI, as well as in other adjacent influential posit…

Do you have sources for these beliefs of the board or is this something ascertained through the huffing and puffing the last few days? Because I do understand that perspective but to me it’s been one painted by the capitalists trying to gain the tech for themselves and we haven’t heard much from the board itself about safety. From my understanding was that the board wanted a company to safely develop the tech and def…

You have to read between some lines and connect some dots here, since nothing is really publicly known and it's difficult to know if we can trust public statements anyway. Which of course means I could be completely wrong.

Still, an example I'd point to is this article where Dustin Moskovitz, who has close ties to the OpenAI board [1], is quoted saying "The thing I’m most interested in is making sure that state-of-the-art later generations, like GPT-5, GPT-6, get run through safety evaluations before being released into the world". [2] I'm not sure how else to read that other than that he doesn't think normal peons should have unfiltered access to this tech, and it would be unsafe if they did.

Beyond that, if the board shared my view (perhaps yours as well?) that the safest thing would be to make all of this FOSS, and either profits or elitist safetyism weren't important to them, why wasn't everything FOSS already?

Less concretely - the kind of elitist "we know best" attitude is exactly what I've come to expect from the effective altruism crowd, which several of the players involved here have publicly expressed alignment with.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38353330

[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/24/asanas-dustin-moskovitz-is-b...

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#785

Post by code_runner »

hartator wrote: post #617
code_runner wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe chatgpt is overhyped a bit (maybe a lot).... most of that hype is external to OAI. But to boil it down to autocomplete is just totally disingenuous.

> But to boil it down to autocomplete is just totally disingenuous. It is though from Ilya's own words: "We weren't expecting that just finding the next word will lead to something intelligent; ChatGPT just finds the next token" Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA

if you'd like to take a quote out of context in order to equate two different technologies, you just go to town.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#786

Post by xvector »

GCA10 wrote: post #531
xvector wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His sister is clearly mentally ill. Allegations are impossible to prove or deny. They should simply be ignored like the unhinged rantings of mentally ill people in general.

Bad things can happen to mentally ill people.

Yes, but it doesn't mean you need to entertain everything they say. Especially not paranoid delusions like "Apple and Google and Twitter are conspiring with Sam Altman to shadowban me."

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#787

Post by stavros »

DalasNoin wrote: post #782
stavros wrote: post #717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because GPT-4 is already pretty neutered, to the point where it removes a lot of its usefulness.

It is unfortunate that some people hear AI safety and think about chatbots saying mean stuff, and others think about a future system performing the machine revolution against humanity.

Can it perform the machine revolution against humanity if it can't even say mean stuff?

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#788

Post by quickthrower2 »

righthand wrote: post #712
quickthrower2 wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI safety types don't want to release models (or in this case models, architecture, IP) to the public.

That doesn’t make sense. You mean companies like Microsoft and business types like Altman don’t want to release infra to the public. Microsoft and Altman may hide under the guise of “it’s not safe to share this stuff” but they’re intent is capital gain not safety. True safety believers understand that safety comes from a general understanding by everyone and audit-able infra otherwise you have no transparency about t…

The impression I get from what I read is that AI safety people want to have large cutting edge foundational models they control, can do testing and research on. They have no interest in open sourcing those cutting edge models. Whether this makes sense in the long run I don't know, but it is what I meant by AI safety types.

Of course money makers want to keep it closed source to extract rent. In some ways that is an area of agreement between the capitalists and the safety people.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#789

Post by ibejoeb »

paulddraper wrote: post #18

As of 10am PT, 700 of 770 employees have signed the call for board resignation. [1] [1] https://twitter.com/joannejang/status/1726667504133808242

To whoever is CEO of OpenAI tomorrow morning: I'll swing by there if you're looking for people.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#790

Post by xvector »

evantbyrne wrote: post #711
smegger001 wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its called infantile amnesia it why people cant remember their earlychildhood as the brains not great at storing and generating autobiographical memories until about age 5. And it is well recognized in the literature.

You're misrepresenting the medical literature. It is not abnormal for children to form memories of highly personal events at that age.

This discussion is irrelevant, there is no point in entertaining the delusions of a paranoid schizophrenic. There is literally no direction for this to go in.

Anyone that has professionally worked with the mentally ill knows that entertaining her claims is a complete and utter waste of time.

Post reply on HN