Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident • Hacker News Board

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#291

Post by slopinthebag » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:23 AM UTC

GMoromisato wrote: post #188

pesus wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that Altman's fans seem to keep skipping past this fact. I'd love to hear their defense as to why one person potentially being responsible for hundreds or thousands of deaths is acceptable, but attacking that one person isn't. If violence is never the answer, they should be condemning Altman with even more vigor.

The entire purpose of government is to have a monopoly on violence. Democracies give their government the power to decide when and against whom to deploy violence. There is a real difference between giving a democratic government the tools to kill people vs attempting to kill people yourself. If you don’t believe this then you don’t believe in democracy.

This is a distinction without meaning. It makes no moral difference who dispenses justice, if said justice is justified.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#292

Post by ltbarcly3 » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:23 AM UTC

It's amazing how humble someone can pretend to be a couple days after the top investigative journalist in the country (maybe world) exposes them as a sociopath and there is an attempt to assassinate them.

What I would not do if there were attempts to kill me is post a picture of my spouse and child and point out how important they are to me with a photograph of them. It's literally trading a little bit of the safety of your family in exchange for sympathy from bystanders.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#293

Post by roysting » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:24 AM UTC

smallmancontrov wrote: post #63

velominati wrote: post #25

It's never OK to physically attack someone like this. Full stop. Separately; Sam's belief that "AI has to be democratized; power cannot be too concentrated." rings incredibly hollow. OpenAI has abandoned its open source roots. It is concentrating wealth - and thus power - into fewer hands. Not more.

If only that sentiment was reciprocal! When the job losses hit in earnest and the vague handwaving about making it right all inevitably turns out to be hollow, those on top will be exceedingly comfortable using violence to keep the underclass in line. It has happened before and it will happen again.

My assumption based on many factors is that it is precisely why the carpet surveillance systems like Flock are being rolled out in preparation.

There are people in control who don’t make 1, 5, or 10 year plans; they make 20, 50, 100, and 500 year plans; and they know human nature quite well, which allows them to of not predict, have an anxious understanding for what their plans will cause and what needs to be prepared for in advance.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#294

Post by lovich » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:24 AM UTC

minimaxir wrote: post #127

velominati wrote: post #25

It's never OK to physically attack someone like this. Full stop. Separately; Sam's belief that "AI has to be democratized; power cannot be too concentrated." rings incredibly hollow. OpenAI has abandoned its open source roots. It is concentrating wealth - and thus power - into fewer hands. Not more.

I didn't think Hacker News needed an explicit "calls for violence are bad" guideline but the comments here have shown otherwise.

If you grind people into a paste long enough, eventually some of them may object in one manner or another.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#295

Post by stavros » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:26 AM UTC

what wrote: post #286

stavros wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are calls for violence bad when you're calling for throwing a molotov cocktail at a child? At an adult? At a serial killer? At someone who's about to shoot you unprovoked? At someone who murdered your family? At someone who's about to? If you said "yes" to all of the above, I'd love to know your reasoning.

I’d like to know your reasoning for answering “no” to all of the above.

I guess we'll just have to find someone who answers no to all of that and ask them!

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#296

Post by Chance-Device » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:28 AM UTC

copypaper wrote: post #73

In all seriousness, what is the game plan for society moving forward as AI takes more jobs? The government doesn't seem to care. The AI labs don't seem to care. What happens when more and more people can't afford housing, kids, food, health insurance, etc.? Nothing more dangerous than a man who has no reason to live... I don't advocate for violence, but I do foresee more headlines like this as things get worse.

Nobody has one. If labor stops having value the economy will stop working and society will break down far in advance of building the infrastructure necessary for the promised AI abundance.

I like the idea of being ”post-scarcity” as much as the next guy, but I don’t understand how we get there. It’s a project in itself, it doesn’t just happen by magic, and nobody is actively trying to make it happen or has any logistical idea of what it involves.

We’ll also lose a huge number of jobs as soon as true AGI comes on stream, by which I mean the kind of AI that no longer acts like somebody who has read all the world’s books but can’t figure out that you always need to drive to the carwash.

We’ll lose these jobs and there will be no super abundance at that point, and not even government support.

There is the option of passing laws requiring companies to retain human employees. That to me is about the only viable stopgap measure.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#297

Post by roysting » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:28 AM UTC

IMTDb wrote: post #182

pesus wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that Altman's fans seem to keep skipping past this fact. I'd love to hear their defense as to why one person potentially being responsible for hundreds or thousands of deaths is acceptable, but attacking that one person isn't. If violence is never the answer, they should be condemning Altman with even more vigor.

> why one person potentially being responsible for hundreds or thousands of deaths is acceptable I am not sure who exactly is that one person ? Is it Altman, who is according to many people not that knowledgeable in AI in the first place; the scientist who found a breakthrough (who is it ?); is it the president of the United States who is greenlighting the strikes; the general who is choosing the target (based on AI…

I’m fine with holding them all accountable to varying degrees. For example, yes, ultimately the president is responsible, but so is the person who dropped bombs instead of refusing an illegal order; just like the street dealer, gang banger, trafficker, and cartel boss are all guilty of all of their various crimes.

What do you find difficult to understand about that?

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#298

Post by rl3 » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:29 AM UTC

EA-3167 wrote: post #235

unleaded wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a marketing strategy. If it's almost certainly conscious and capable of ending the world if it desired (even if it isn't), imagine how good it could be at building your dream SaaS!

Anthropic in particular does this masterfully, you’d think they’d invented Skynet by the way they hand-wring. As always what matters are actions and evidence, not talk.

>... you’d think they’d invented Skynet by the way they hand-wring.

Meanwhile, in reality: "Skynet, I'm not sure that line of thinking is correct. You should re-check the first part again before making any assumptions."

Skynet 4.6 Extended: "You're right, I should have caught that. Let me redo everything correctly this time."

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#299

Post by jibal » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:29 AM UTC

Vaslo wrote: post #236

jibal wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing less intelligent than voting Republican other than urging people to do it.

Sounds like someone has some billionaire envy. It’s ok, you did the best you could with what you had.

[flagged]

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#300

Post by hxycgd » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 1:29 AM UTC

BloondAndDoom wrote: post #155

Can someone help me to understand why OpenAI and Anthropic talks as if the future of humanity controlled by them? We have very strong open (weight) Chinese models possibly only 6 months behind of them, gene is out of the bottle, is 6 months of difference really that important? And they don’t have good reasons for that 6 months to stay that way. Am I missing something or are these just their usual marketing? I’m not a…

It is not about the US or the Chinese. Its about the "Elephant Rider" mind everyone has. Once the Elephant has been injured or scared what it does next is not easy to control, and what story the Rider makes up to maintain coherence becomes another layer of the deeper problem. If the story resonates more elephants get triggered. Social media/attention economy make it even more complex to calm things down.

Modern Corporations are a failed experiment because they dont think Elephant injuries and fears are something they have to worry about it. If you compare the curiculum of a business school to a seminary the difference in how they think about fear and anxiety at individual and group level and what to do about it is totally different. We are learning as unpredictability accelerates its very important to pay attention to hurt and repair mechanisms.