41–50 of 54 posts
From the article: > Two YC partners sat Altman down last year “and told him, ‘Slow down, chill out!’ ” another partner, Jonathan Levy, told me. “Sam said, ‘Yes, you’re right!’—and went off and did something else on the side that we didn’t know about for a while.” Seems consistent with the original "leadership transition" announcement: > Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a lot of people think you are autistic, chances are you are autistic. It's a spectrum. We've all got a lil bit of that going on. Some more than others, particularly in our ecosystem.
> It's a spectrum. We've all got a lil bit of that going on. I apologize for the specificity of the nit I'm about to pick, but the "spectrum" part of Autism Spectrum Disorder does not mean that every person is on it! ASD has very specific diagnostic criteria ( https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/hcp-dsm.html ) according to which an individual is either diagnosed with ASD or not.
If you have 95% of the symptoms of autism, but not 100%, what does that mean? Sorry get fucked you're not autistic. You're close, but not quite! See you in six months.
At the end of the day the treatment path will be the same (ie, there is none, learn to accept yourself and manage your neurodivergence like the rest of us)
I read this article perhaps two or three years ago and it's one of the reasons I always had a slightly negative view of Sam Altman because he comes off as just slightly insufferable (that whole Bronze Age sword sequence, for example). I don't necessarily think that was absolutely without merit: one tires of CEOs and SV types who think too much of themselves and don't attribute enough of their success to simply being…
If the employees truly came together to collectively bargain why wouldn’t they unionize at the same time to protect against similar abuses by the board in the future?
It is generally associated with less performant companies, which is not in the interests of those employed in a rapidly growing company.
> After a Dutch lab modified the H5N1 bird-flu virus, five years ago, making it super contagious, the chance of a lethal synthetic virus being released in the next twenty years became, well, nonzero. He must have felt pretty vindicated about his prepper's stance when COVID happened five years after this statement.
> After a Dutch lab modified the H5N1 bird-flu virus, five years ago, making it super contagious, the chance of a lethal synthetic virus being released in the next twenty years became, well, nonzero. He must have felt pretty vindicated about his prepper's stance when COVID happened five years after this statement.
Why? Covid-19 was a natural spillover, not a "synthetic virus". If he does feel vindicated he's a straight up loony conspiracy theorist.
I don't have an opinion, but am curious.
I ask because there were released US NIH emails discussing a base sequence not close to any in natural sequences, and concern it was in fact synthesized under the "gain of function" funding provided to Wuhan from the NIH.
Obliquely related : https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/
From the article: > Two YC partners sat Altman down last year “and told him, ‘Slow down, chill out!’ ” another partner, Jonathan Levy, told me. “Sam said, ‘Yes, you’re right!’—and went off and did something else on the side that we didn’t know about for a while.” Seems consistent with the original "leadership transition" announcement: > Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which…
> After a Dutch lab modified the H5N1 bird-flu virus, five years ago, making it super contagious, the chance of a lethal synthetic virus being released in the next twenty years became, well, nonzero. He must have felt pretty vindicated about his prepper's stance when COVID happened five years after this statement.
Why? Covid-19 was a natural spillover, not a "synthetic virus". If he does feel vindicated he's a straight up loony conspiracy theorist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Covid-19 was a natural spillover, not a "synthetic virus". If he does feel vindicated he's a straight up loony conspiracy theorist.
evidence you base this on? I don't have an opinion, but am curious. I ask because there were released US NIH emails discussing a base sequence not close to any in natural sequences, and concern it was in fact synthesized under the "gain of function" funding provided to Wuhan from the NIH. Obliquely related : https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
evidence you base this on? I don't have an opinion, but am curious. I ask because there were released US NIH emails discussing a base sequence not close to any in natural sequences, and concern it was in fact synthesized under the "gain of function" funding provided to Wuhan from the NIH. Obliquely related : https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/
Please do not drag in unrelated, tangential threads, especially flame-bait material like this. Regardless of what you believe about the original topic, dragging this into totally unrelated threads only creates problems and is a disruptive behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please do not drag in unrelated, tangential threads, especially flame-bait material like this. Regardless of what you believe about the original topic, dragging this into totally unrelated threads only creates problems and is a disruptive behavior.
I mean, the parent of the person you're responded to made what is an increasingly shaky claim that COVID-19 was due to "natural spillover". I don't necessarily think it's wrong that that comment shouldn't be allowed to pass without challenge. I'm not sure we're ever going to know the real origins of COVID-19.
Also, try to use less double negations in your writing "I don't necessarily think it's wrong that that comment shouldn't be allowed to pass without challenge." is an atrocious construction.