Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

theconversation.com

41–50 of 316 posts

Re: OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

#41
post #29

How could this ever have been done safely? Either you are pushing the envelope in order to remain a relevant top player, in which case your models aren't safe. Or you aren't, in which case you aren't relevant.

I think right here is high on the list of “Why is Apple behind in AI?”. To be clear, I’m not saying at all that I agree with Apple or that I’m defending their position. However, I think that Apple’s lackluster AI products have largely been a result of them, not feeling comfortable with the uncertainty of LLM’s.

That’s not to paint them as wise beyond their years or anything like that, but just that historically Apple has wanted strict control over its products and what they do and LLMs throw that out the window. Unfortunately that that’s also what people find incredibly useful about LLMs, their uncertainty is one of the most “magical” aspects IMHO.

Re: OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

#42
One of the biggest pieces of "writing on the wall" for this IMO was when, in the April 15 2025 Preparedness Framework update, they dropped persuasion/manipulation from their Tracked Categories.

https://openai.com/index/updating-our-preparedness-framework...

https://fortune.com/2025/04/16/openai-safety-framework-manip...

> OpenAI said it will stop assessing its AI models prior to releasing them for the risk that they could persuade or manipulate people, possibly helping to swing elections or create highly effective propaganda campaigns.

> The company said it would now address those risks through its terms of service, restricting the use of its AI models in political campaigns and lobbying, and monitoring how people are using the models once they are released for signs of violations.

To see persuasion/manipulation as simply a multiplier on other invention capabilities, and something that can be patched on a model already in use, is a very specific statement on what AI safety means.

Certainly, an AI that can design weapons of mass destruction could be an existential threat to humanity. But so, too, is a system that subtly manipulates an entire world to lose its ability to perceive reality.

Re: OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

#43
> But the ChatGPT maker seems to no longer have the same emphasis on doing so “safely.”

A step in the positive direction, at least they don't have to pretend any longer.

It's like Google and "don't be evil". People didn't get upset with Google because they were more evil than others, heck, there's Oracle, defense contractors and the prison industrial system. People were upset with them because they were hypocrites. They pretended to be something they were not.

Re: OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

#44

Nobody should have any illusion about the purpose of most business - make money. The "safety" is a nice to have if it does not diminish the profits of the business. This is the cold hard truth. If you start to look through the optics of business == money making machine , you can start to think at rational regulations to curb this in order to protect the regular people. The regulations should keep business in check wh…

It was never about safety.

"Safety" was just a mechanism for complete control of the best LLM available.

When every AI provider did not trust their competitor to deliver "AGI" safely, what they really mean was they did not want that competitor to own the definition of "AGI" which means an IPOing first.

Using local models from China that is on par with the US ones takes away that control, and this is why Anthropic has no open weight models at all and their CEO continues to spread fear about open weight models.

Re: OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

#46
post #9

It's all beginning to feel a bit like an arms race where you have to go at a breakneck pace or someone else is going to beat you, and winner takes all.

But what if AI turns out to be a commodity? We're already replacing ChatGPT by Claude or Gemini, whenever we feel like it. Nobody has a moat. It seems the real moat is with hardware companies, or silicon fabs even.

The arms race is just to keep the investors coming, because they still believe that there is a market to corner.

Re: OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is no longer about money, it's about power.

> This is no longer about money, it's about power This is more Altman-speak. Before it was about how AI was going to end the world. That started backfiring, so now we're talking about political power. That power, however, ultimately flows from the wealth AI generates. It's about the money. They're for-profit corporations.

Has AI generated any wealth?

Re: OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is no longer about money, it's about power.

> This is no longer about money, it's about power This is more Altman-speak. Before it was about how AI was going to end the world. That started backfiring, so now we're talking about political power. That power, however, ultimately flows from the wealth AI generates. It's about the money. They're for-profit corporations.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

#50
post #9

It's all beginning to feel a bit like an arms race where you have to go at a breakneck pace or someone else is going to beat you, and winner takes all.

I mean, the leaders of these companies and politicians have been framing it that way for a while, but if AGI isn't possible with LLMs (which I think is the case, and a lot of important scientists also think this), then it raises a question: arms race to WHAT exactly? Mass unemployment and wealth redistribution upwards? So AI can produce what humans previously did, but kinda worse, with a lot of supervision? I don't h…

I think that’s why they are encouraging the mindset mentioned in your parent comment: it’s completely reversed the tech job market to have people thinking they have to accept whatever’s offered, allowing a reversal of the wages and benefits improvements which workers saw around the pandemic. It doesn’t even have to be truly caused by AI, just getting information workers to think they’re about to be replaced is worth billions to companies.
Post reply on HN