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

The Contradictions of Sam Altman

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 564 posts

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#181

Post by cowl »

jeremyjh wrote: post #125
cowl wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's my point. If their opposition was not on principle but based on the naive Idea that "we will live in peace and harmony", I really am afraid what other naive principles are in the bases of their work and what safeguards are being set in place for the AIs.

There is a such thing as being principled and then finding out you were naive.

ofcourse but then you still must have some principles and be as loud about how naive you were as you were when you were protesting the thing in the first place.

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#182

Post by blibble »

G_z9 wrote: post #120
TechnicolorByte wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a capped-profit structure where excess profit will supposedly go back to the no-profit side. From a recent NYTimes article [1]: > But these profits are capped, and any additional revenue will be pumped back into the OpenAI nonprofit that was founded back in 2015. > His grand idea is that OpenAI will capture much of the world’s wealth through the creation of A.G.I. and then redistribute this wealth to the people.…

This is ducking insane. How are people not up in arms about this? Imagine if the guy who invented recombinant insulin stated publicly that he intended to capture the entire medical sector and then use the money and power to reshape society by distributing wealth as he saw fit. That’s ducking insane and dangerous. This guy has lost his fucking mind and needs to be stopped.

> How are people not up in arms about this?

they will be once they realise

> This guy has lost his fucking mind and needs to be stopped.

I agree, hopefully via regulation

otherwise the 21st century luddites will

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#183

Post by fooster »

anon84873628 wrote: post #88
poopypoopington wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard Altman (on the Lex Friedman podcast) and Sundar Pichai (on the Hard Fork podcast) say things to this degree. The thing that OpenAI really managed to crack was building a great product in ChatGPT and finding a good product market fit for LLMs.

What's the product market fit for LLMs, and how does OpenAI fill it?

How much money is openai making from chatgpt premium now? How much revenue are they they making from the api?

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#184

Post by majormajor »

dantheman wrote: post #178
DubiousPusher wrote: post #169

Stop asking the market to look after collective interest. This is the job of the government. The ultimate effect of virtue wanking CEOs and corporate governance is to deceive people into thinking democracy is something that can be achieved by for profit organizations and that they can forsake the formal binding of collective interest through law. It's nice if people are nice but it is not a bulwark of the collective…

In general governments have done far more harm to individuals than anyone in the market. The job of the government is to protect your individual rights not the collective interest.

That's just quibbling over what "your individual rights" are; where does the line get drawn between "exercising my right" and "having my rights infringed on by the actions of another." There is no shortage of harm done by "anyone in the market" today, whether it's currently illegal and we call it "crime" instead of just a person exercising their freedom, or whether it's harm that isn't regulated today.

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#185

Post by 7e »

dantheman wrote: post #178
DubiousPusher wrote: post #169

Stop asking the market to look after collective interest. This is the job of the government. The ultimate effect of virtue wanking CEOs and corporate governance is to deceive people into thinking democracy is something that can be achieved by for profit organizations and that they can forsake the formal binding of collective interest through law. It's nice if people are nice but it is not a bulwark of the collective…

In general governments have done far more harm to individuals than anyone in the market. The job of the government is to protect your individual rights not the collective interest.

Promoting the general welfare is literally discussed in the first paragraph of the U.S. Constitution. The Bill of Rights came later.

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#186

Post by mimd »

He's begging for regulatory capture. "I can destroy the world but I won't. My competitor's will, so regulate them." A shrewd plan considering he's not offering something beyond what another company with a large nvidia cluster could offer.

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#187

Post by sobkas »

dragonelite wrote: post #139
victor106 wrote: post #126

> OpenAI and Microsoft also created a joint safety board, which includes Mr. Altman and Microsoft Chief Technology Officer Kevin Scott, that has the power to roll back Microsoft and OpenAI product releases if they are deemed too dangerous. what a joke. find me one instance where the ceo of a company picked public interest/safety over profits when there was no regulatory oversight?

Do people really think AI will go haywire like in the Hollywood movies?

> Do people really think AI will go haywire like in the Hollywood movies?

No, it will just make every inequality even harder to fight. Because computer algorithm can't be biased so every decision it makes will be objective. And because it's really hard to know why AI made decision, it will be impossible to accuse it of racism, bigotry, xenophobia. While rich and powerful will be ones deciding (through hands of "developers") what data will be used to train AIs.

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#188

Post by mellosouls »

There seems a lot of negative perception of the guy here, and OpenAI definitely deserve criticism for some stuff (so as the CEO, so does he), but - even if it was built on the work of others, and with the obvious caution about what may come next - he and they deserve immense respect and credit for bringing in this new AI age.

They did it. Nobody else.

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#189

Post by clarkmoody »

7e wrote: post #185
dantheman wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general governments have done far more harm to individuals than anyone in the market. The job of the government is to protect your individual rights not the collective interest.

Promoting the general welfare is literally discussed in the first paragraph of the U.S. Constitution. The Bill of Rights came later.

The Constitution is just a piece of paper. For every thousand steps the Congress, regulators, and state assemblies take in the direction of tyranny, the courts claw back one or two.

Re: The Contradictions of Sam Altman

#190

Post by piloto_ciego »

dantheman wrote: post #178
DubiousPusher wrote: post #169

Stop asking the market to look after collective interest. This is the job of the government. The ultimate effect of virtue wanking CEOs and corporate governance is to deceive people into thinking democracy is something that can be achieved by for profit organizations and that they can forsake the formal binding of collective interest through law. It's nice if people are nice but it is not a bulwark of the collective…

In general governments have done far more harm to individuals than anyone in the market. The job of the government is to protect your individual rights not the collective interest.

I don’t know that this is true.

At very least they both share immense responsibility for causing individual harm. Sure the government may start a war, but that war can’t happen without bombs and bullets, and in America at least those factories aren’t run by the government. There is an intermediate step oftentimes, but I don’t think that necessarily disconnects companies from responsibility.

If you work at a guided bomb factory you may not be the person dropping it, but you are responsible for the destruction it causes in a small way.

Also, if global warming kills us all then it is likely that the oil companies bear some responsibility for it right?

Government sucks - I agree with that statement, but we shouldn’t act like corporations are appreciably less responsible.

Post reply on HN