Live data from Hacker News

Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

techcrunch.com

331–340 of 461 posts

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#331
post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When shit hits the fan they are going to blame AI, but then not even use hand sanitizer. They will 100% be using OAI as a scapegoat, although I'd like to see the OAI goat stay and someone else run into the woods. All Lawful Use is a tautology with fascists because they cannot break laws by definition.

Yeah, here's some examples of all these fascists doing exactly that: Soviet Union - The show trials of the 1930s were conducted with full legal apparatus: confessions, judges, verdicts. Stalin's purges operated through legally constituted troikas. Entirely "lawful" by Soviet law. East Germany (DDR) - The Stasi's surveillance and harassment programmes were codified in law. When the wall fell, many Stasi officers genui…

You should ask the language model that output this text the definition of 'whataboutism,' and if the comment you've posted responds meaningfully to the discussion at hand.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#332
post #141
post #92

@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 f…

>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://inve…

> Anthropic actually partnered up with Palantir. They are not the saints you think they are, either.

And now you've got people on here saying, well actually Palantir ain't so bad, you see! They're just one tool in the chain, basically just boring data integration, like IBM!

The mental gymnastics is difficult to keep up with.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Amodei is widely underestimated. The consensus viewpoint on the deal that OpenAI struck with the Pentagon is that Anthropic got played. I disagree. I'm certain that Amodei and his team gamed this out. In doing so, I think there's at least two conclusions they would have drawn: 1. Some other AI company would cut a deal with the Pentagon. There's no world in which all the labs boycott the Pentagon. So who? Choo…

There is also: 3. Talent migration to Anthropic. No serious researcher working towards AGI will want it to be in the hands of OpenAI anymore. They are all asking themselves: "do I trust Sam or Dario more with AGI/ASI?" and are finding the former lacking. It is already telling that Anthropic's models outperform OAI's with half the headcount and a fraction of the funding.

I think that's wishful thinking. Just because someone is a "serious" researcher (careful, sounds like a No True Scotsman coming up), it doesn't mean that they care about AI guardrails or safety, or think our current administration is immoral.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#334
OAI employees, please talk.

~93 Employees signed up the notdivided.org petition. Some of OAI employees could be reading this comment right now.

Let's be real, OpenAI backstabbed Anthropic. Even Dario has essentially just said it now.

(Shameless plug?) but I created an ASK HN about it: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition [0] and not a single person from OAI responded when I just wanted to discuss :/ and hey that's fine I don't mind but please don't mind me either when I re-raise this topic

From a comment from the thread about OAI on hackernews by tedsanders (OAI employee) [Please don't harass anybody]

> I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue competing on the basis of differing services and not differing scruples). Given this understanding, I don't see why I should quit. If it turns out that the deal is being misdescribed or that it won't be enforced, I can see why I should quit, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that's the case.

Ted, if you are reading this, I truly felt like you were right. I was still skeptic because part of me felt like it doesn't make sense and well it didn't. But I had trusted ya and I thought that you had far greater insights than us but now I am not sure...

Sir, I have no ill-will towards you but I just want to know, you have gone silent after this comment and one another about GPT 5.3 instant as far as I can see. You did say in the first that you will go out on a limb with public comment, so please don't mind me if I ask questions in public about that comment

The question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?

That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.

If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?

The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?

I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.

I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?

A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.

People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.

Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.

Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.

Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doing

A lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.

If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.

[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, here's some examples of all these fascists doing exactly that: Soviet Union - The show trials of the 1930s were conducted with full legal apparatus: confessions, judges, verdicts. Stalin's purges operated through legally constituted troikas. Entirely "lawful" by Soviet law. East Germany (DDR) - The Stasi's surveillance and harassment programmes were codified in law. When the wall fell, many Stasi officers genui…

You should ask the language model that output this text the definition of 'whataboutism,' and if the comment you've posted responds meaningfully to the discussion at hand.

[flagged]

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#337
post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 peo…

> 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 pro…

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

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#338

When @sama announced within hours that OAI was replacing Anthropic with the "same conditions ", it was clear that either the DoW or OAI (or both) were fudging. DoW balked at Anthropic's conditions so OAI's agreement must have made the "conditions" basically unenforceable. And sure enough, my reading of it left the impression the OAI conditions were basically "DoW won't do anything which violates the rules DoW sets fo…

@sama's did say: "[..] will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control". Law is what Trump decides.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#339

When @sama announced within hours that OAI was replacing Anthropic with the "same conditions ", it was clear that either the DoW or OAI (or both) were fudging. DoW balked at Anthropic's conditions so OAI's agreement must have made the "conditions" basically unenforceable. And sure enough, my reading of it left the impression the OAI conditions were basically "DoW won't do anything which violates the rules DoW sets fo…

Agree with this completely. But besides Sam Altman, this whole episode has made me totally and completely lose all respect for Paul Graham. I used to really idolize pg, and I really used to like his essays, but over the years I've found his essays increasingly displayed a disturbing lack of introspection, like they'd always seem to say that starting a startup is the best thing anyone can do, and if you're not good at…

Billions of dollars is a hell of a drug.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, here's some examples of all these fascists doing exactly that: Soviet Union - The show trials of the 1930s were conducted with full legal apparatus: confessions, judges, verdicts. Stalin's purges operated through legally constituted troikas. Entirely "lawful" by Soviet law. East Germany (DDR) - The Stasi's surveillance and harassment programmes were codified in law. When the wall fell, many Stasi officers genui…

You should ask the language model that output this text the definition of 'whataboutism,' and if the comment you've posted responds meaningfully to the discussion at hand.

I think similar to how AI-generated comments are frowned upon, "this comment was generated by Ai" comments should also be frowned upon. It's really annoying to see a well written comment and replies that don't address the comment but just accuse the poster of having used Ai to generate the comment.
Post reply on HN