Live data from Hacker News

Sam Altman may control our future – can he be trusted?

newyorker.com

621–630 of 1001 posts

Re: Sam Altman may control our future – can he be trusted?

#621

Why would anyone trust him at all? their tech is used to bomb children, all of these rich folks are immoral only about their selfish gain.

> their tech is used to bomb children If you're talking about the school in Iran, that wasn't OpenAI. That was a Palantir system that pre-dates OAI by a few years, and was due to a bad entry in a spreadsheet, that showed the building as military housing. Which it was a few years ago. 180 people lost their lives because of bad data in spreadsheet, but not AI.

180 children lost their lives because of decisions by people in the US military (and ultimately the US government / the POTUS).

Let's not fall into the trap of adopting narratives created to waive accountability. The spreadsheet didn't launch a missile, the spreadsheet didn't authorize the strike and the spreadsheet didn't select the target.

Not to mention that "outdated spreadsheet" is also a hilariously anachronistic excuse for a war crime if you consider what kind of satellite technology the US has publicly acknowledged to have access to, let alone what kind of technology it is likely to have access to.

The difference between intentional premeditated murder and reckless endangerment resulting in a killing is not guilt and innocence but merely the severity and nature of a crime. Both demonstrate a callous disregard for the sanctity of human life, one just specifically seeks to extinguish it, the other merely accepts death and suffering as an acceptable outcome.

Re: Sam Altman may control our future – can he be trusted?

#624

I found it very interesting that Altman et al were worried that AI will become supremely intelligent and China will make a supervirus or some AI drones or whatnot, but not a single person was worried about destroying all jobs because we wouldn't need humans any more. Or maybe they were not so much "worried" but "hopeful" that they'd amass literally all the wealth in the world.

Altman is an advocate of Universal Basic Income, as far as I'm aware. That doesn't sound like he's not worried about massive job losses. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sam-altman-universal-basic-inco... https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sam-altman-wants-universal-ex...

> Altman is an advocate of Universal Basic Income

So he says. And the way he proposed reaching that was with a scam cryptocurrency under his control which has rightfully been banned in several countries.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/richardnieva/worldcoin-...

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoi...

Re: Sam Altman may control our future – can he be trusted?

#626

“By 2018, several Y.C. partners were so frustrated with Altman’s behavior that they approached Graham to complain. Graham and Jessica Livingston, his wife and a Y.C. founder, apparently had a frank conversation with Altman. Afterward, Graham started telling people that although Altman had agreed to leave the company, he was resisting in practice” You can subtly see residue of this frustration in Dalton and Michael’s…

That guy is a snake, not just while at YC.

Re: Sam Altman may control our future – can he be trusted?

#627
Reading this makes me even happier to pay for Anthropic.

Amodei and his sister saw through the behavior and called it out.

" “Eighty per cent of the charter was just betrayed,” Amodei recalled. He confronted Altman, who denied that the provision existed. Amodei read it aloud, pointing to the text, and ultimately forced another colleague to confirm its existence to Altman directly. (Altman doesn’t remember this.) Amodei’s notes describe escalating tense encounters, including one, months later, in which Altman summoned him and his sister, Daniela, who worked in safety and policy at the company, to tell them that he had it on “good authority” from a senior executive that they had been plotting a coup. Daniela, the notes continue, “lost it,” and brought in that executive, who denied having said anything. As one person briefed on the exchange recalled, Altman then denied having made the claim. “I didn’t even say that,” he said. “You just said that,” Daniela replied. (Altman said that this was not quite his recollection, and that he had accused the Amodeis only of “political behavior.”) In 2020, Amodei, Daniela, and other colleagues left to found Anthropic, which is now one of OpenAI’s chief rivals."

Re: Sam Altman may control our future – can he be trusted?

#629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We talk about Sam Altman a lot. At this point he has a Hollywood movie in post-production, a book ("The Optimist"), and a seemingly endless stream of profiles. It feels intellectually lazy to keep researching the same guy when the industry is moving beyond him. All evidence today suggests Anthropic is passing OpenAI in relative and absolute growth. So where's the critical reporting? The DOD coverage was framed around…

> whether the company that branded itself as the ethical AI lab actually is one FWIW I have two(!!) close friends working for Anthropic, one for nearly two years and one for about 4 months. Both of them tell me that this is not just marketing, that the company actually is ethical and safety conscious everywhere, and that this was the most surprising part about joining Anthropic for them. They insist the culture is ac…

> the company actually is ethical and safety conscious everywhere

I wonder what Anthropic tries to achieve by spreading such blatant lies with their bot accounts. I'm definitely not buying anything from a company so morally corrupt to smear the competition while claiming to be somehow "ethical". And I'm not talking just about this thread, it's a recurring pattern on Reddit.

Re: Sam Altman may control our future – can he be trusted?

#630
post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their tech is used to bomb children If you're talking about the school in Iran, that wasn't OpenAI. That was a Palantir system that pre-dates OAI by a few years, and was due to a bad entry in a spreadsheet, that showed the building as military housing. Which it was a few years ago. 180 people lost their lives because of bad data in spreadsheet, but not AI.

180 children lost their lives because of decisions by people in the US military (and ultimately the US government / the POTUS). Let's not fall into the trap of adopting narratives created to waive accountability. The spreadsheet didn't launch a missile, the spreadsheet didn't authorize the strike and the spreadsheet didn't select the target. Not to mention that "outdated spreadsheet" is also a hilariously anachronist…

Please talk to your criminal defense lawyer.

This is nonsense.

Post reply on HN