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

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

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 461 posts

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

#301

Post by wilg »

don_esteban wrote: post #298
wilg wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Democratic_Party_presiden... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Democratic_Party_presiden... Skill issue. Run your candidate. Convince people to vote for them. > How much has the current administration asked the public about going to war with Iran? THE ELECTIONS are how the public weighs in.

Re: Skill issue Money issue. This is not level playing ground, the field is severely tilted. The referee is bought. But you are saying: You lost fair and square, wait 4 years to have any say in what is going on. Re: THE ELECTIONS are how the public weighs in. When the choice is between Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the public's choice is meaningless. To say nothing about politicians outright shamelessly lying (e.g. Trum…

Money issue is also a skill issue, but I have no doubt in the era of free media someone could figure it out.

Sorry I didn't invent the idea that there are federal elections every two years, I'm just telling you that you have to win them. Bonus points: this is also how you can change the election schedule or political system!

If you're saying both candidates were bad when one was Trump, and the other was Hillary, Kamala, or Joe, then you don't have very good judgement. I agree Trump lying about not starting a war was bad. Many of us have said for years that he is a terrible liar. Please help us.

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

#302

Post by spwa4 »

mrandish wrote: post #57

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…

Except if there's one defining property of the last 4-5 administrations it is that they definitely and constantly violate the rules they set for themselves. With every new administration it gets worse and worse.

And while this administration is brazen about this, it's not really a drastic change anywhere.

In fact most EU laws (GPDR, AI regulation, Chat Control) are directly, up front, declaring they themselves won't respect it. They very directly have one set of rules for states, government employees, ... and ANOTHER set of rules for everyone else. And they're incredibly brazen. For private individuals, companies it goes very far, it's essentially impossible to even know what does and does not violate the GPDR, and you can't ask the courts, that's not allowed. You also cannot use the courts to compel government to do anything under these laws.

For governments, when it comes to what's allowed, it goes incredibly far. Governments can declare any action legal under the GPDR, before and after the fact, without parliament involvement. It does not matter if that action was done by the government themselves, or if it's an action by a private company (so the government can use subcontractors for any violation of the GPDR)

This means that, for THE example given for GPDR protection: medical information. Medical insurance in the EU is either state-owned or has exceptions, the law does the exact opposite of what it appears to do: it makes all your medical information available for medical insurers. And the police (e.g. to find you). And the tax office. And courts. And medical institutions themselves (to deny transplants to smokers). And ... And while doctors (and priests) used to be huge no-no's when it came to information gathering, that's no longer the case. If a doctor uses the state required medical file, your medical information flows straight into a state database, immediately searchable for everyone the GPDR supposedly protects you against.

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

#303

Post by raincole »

davidw wrote: post #234
Towaway69 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do I cancel my subscription to the DoW? The bigger picture is that the DoW got what it wanted and it got it by threatening one company while the other did its bidding.

By voting.

Voting changes the name of the department. It doesn't change if the government wants mass surveillance.

See PRISM.

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

#305

Post by delaminator »

genxy wrote: post #208
thisisit wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most likely scenario is that if it does something “unlawful” and found out - claim that “These machines are black boxes and they don’t know what went wrong. They will set up an investigative committee and find out.”

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 genuinely argued their conduct was legal under GDR statute: a defence that West German courts largely rejected.

Castro's Cuba - Mass executions after the revolution were conducted by legally constituted revolutionary tribunals. Castro explicitly defended this on legality grounds when challenged by foreign press in 1959.

Chavez/Maduro's Venezuela - Suppression of opposition media, jailing of political opponents was consistently defended as operating within Venezuelan law, which was progressively rewritten to make it so. Classic self-referential legality.

Mao's Cultural Revolution - The revolutionary committees had legal standing. Persecution of intellectuals and landlords proceeded through formal (if kangaroo) legal processes.

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

#306

Post by DaedalusII »

foltik wrote: post #247
DaedalusII wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> and they should ignore the government which ostensibly represents the people Barely represents the people. Especially not on the issue of domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous killing machines. Or the war in Vietnam.

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 people desire

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

#308

Post by delaminator »

Towaway69 wrote: post #219
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For consumer ChatGPT accounts, go to their privacy portal [1] and, first, delete your GPTs, and then, second, delete your account. [1] https://privacy.openai.com/policies?modal=take-control

How do I cancel my subscription to the DoW? The bigger picture is that the DoW got what it wanted and it got it by threatening one company while the other did its bidding.

Here's a simple ubsubscribe guide

https://usa.gov/renounce-lose-citizenship

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

#309

Post by don_esteban »

wasabi991011 wrote: post #297
don_esteban wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did democrats offer primaries in the last elections? Did voting for Bernie Sanders in the last two primaries (especially the ones when Trump won for the first time) amount to anything? I wonder how long can the American public keep the self delusion that the elections are anything but a theater for the naive, to keep the pretense the public has any say in things that matter. How much has the current administration as…

> Did voting for Bernie Sanders in the last two primaries (especially the ones when Trump won for the first time) amount to anything? He didn't win the primaries though. It would have amounted to something if he got enough votes.

1) He did not win primaries, in significant part also because DNC was heavily against him. The level playing field thing.

2) If he won the primaries, there is still no guarantee that that would have amounted to anything.

First, he might not have won the elections (mainstream media and the whole ruling elites were heavily against him). And even if he won, he might not have been able to do much against the permanent state.

I still think the main cause of Trump's wins is the deep disillusionment of the democratic voters by Obama's failure (inability/unwillingness) to impact a meaningful change.

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

#310

Post by DaedalusII »

username223 wrote: post #181
phendrenad2 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pg's sama praise bewilders me. Is there some other Sam Altman he's talking about? > Graham was immediately impressed by Altman, later recalling that meeting the 19-year-old felt like what it must have been like to talk to Bill Gates at the same age. He noted Altman's intense "force of will" from their early interactions. Is there a Gates-like "presence" or a "force of will" displayed in his public interviews?

> pg's sama praise bewilders me. Is there some other Sam Altman he's talking about? Paul Graham was a pudgy mediocrity clever enough to capitalize on nerds' obsession with Lisp, and leverage it into f-you money. Game recognized game in the shape of Sam Altman.

yeah man what a mediocre loser all he did was create the first cloud based ecommerce platform , sell it to yahoo for $49m in the 90s, then co-found the most successful early stage VC firm of all time, which made THIS forum which you are using to attack him

lol

Post reply on HN