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

Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#531

Post by electroglyph »

stavros wrote: post #189
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…

The Chinese models are distilled from GPT and Claude, so it's not like China would pull ahead if those companies went away for six months. They really are at the forefront of innovation right now, as much as I hate to think of the consequences of this (a single company owning a superintelligence is basically a nightmare scenario for me).

i don't buy this. distilled how? you don't get access to logprobs, and the thinking traces are fake and compressed. it's an expensive way to get potentially substandard training data.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#532

Post by kennywinker »

suby wrote: post #260
etchalon wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

“It’s always ok to throw out trash”

“Ok but sometimes people throw out stuff that’s not trash because they think it’s trash”

Correct, and that would be not ok because they have mis-identified trash. Doesn’t change anything about the original premise. If you throw out trash, that’s good.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#533

Post by boring-human »

This is an odd choice of a thread for a laundry list of complaints about AI and about a person that, say what you will, is nowhere near the list of planetary "really bad guys". Even if we limit it to tech, the list starts with someone way richer, then goes through four or five way-shadier people.

If you're OK with victim-shaming here, doesn't it say more about you than Altman? What does it say about your viewpoint?

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#535

Post by reenorap »

moralestapia wrote: post #67
dakolli wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Who tf is dumb enough to not do it, though? If I was non-tech and owned a business, and someone (reputable) offers to teach me everything I need to get up to date with the most revolutionary technology of the decade (perhaps century?) for like ... 500 dollars? Why not?

$500/hr maybe. Most of these are like $5000-10k per week.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#537

Post by overfeed »

noduerme wrote: post #390
Tyrubias wrote: post #103

[flagged]

>> Yeah, the words and narratives that Sam Altman promoted caused so much fear and uncertainty and anger that someone thought their only option was to attempt a horrific crime. The problem with this inversion of your first statement (that violence is not the answer), which everyone justifying violence in this thread seems to forget, is that there is always someone who feels this way about anything . The words and nar…

> What they forget is that so does everyone else.

Despite all the high-minded talk, Americans have always been comfortable with violence, since before it was a country: pick a year and I can find 10+ extrajudicial violent incidences. A surprisingly large percentage of US presidents have had assassination attempts against them.

Seeing no changes after Sandy Hook made it abundantly clear to me that occasional violence - even on innocent child victims - is the price America is willing to pay for other freedoms.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#539

Post by kennywinker »

TZubiri wrote: post #517
kelnos wrote: post #208

> AI has to be democratized; power cannot be too concentrated. Control of the future belongs to all people and their institutions. AI needs to empower people individually, and we need to make decisions about our future and the new rules collectively. I do not think it is right that a few AI labs would make the most consequential decisions about the shape of our future. What a bullshit thing for someone who is not act…

they serve like 1B users gratis

Free as in beer, while it takes your job, destroys the environment, and concentrates wealth in the hands of a few.

Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident

#540

Post by eranation »

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.

Few thoughts

- Either we'll slowly become the Expanse universe (basic UBI, very few jobs, you win them via lottery)

- Or we'll go to simpler times - economics is supply and demand, if there will be more demand to human generated work (the same way there is demand for hand made arts, vinyls, paper books, vintage furniture), people will flock more to family, community. Think something between moving to the suburbs and the Amish. If people will "ban" some products generated by AI, or will prefer products generated by humans, then AI will have harder times to take their jobs. It's unlikely to happen, but think about the Organic food industry, about the high end products industry, about the farm to table / buy local industry, about the "support local artists" (farmers markets) - this will likely just grow. Won't help at scale, but it's a possibility

- Or, the Dune way, banning of thinking machines altogether on the state level, I assume some countries might go that way, for religious or other reasons, but again unlikely

- Or, current AI technology will plateau just short of full AGI, and the centaur period will stay for longer. As long as a human + AI can do things slightly better than just AI, (in my book this is not full AGI) - then there is economic incentive to hire a human instead of replacing them.

- Or full apocalypse, the matrix / skynet, idiocracy, hunger games, red rising. I hope for the ignorance is bliss option...

Post reply on HN