441–450 of 567 posts
Looking forward for a document leak about openai using YouTube data for training their models. When asked if they use it, Murali (CTO) told she doesn't know which makes you believe that for 99% they are using it.
I would say 100%, simply because there is no other reasonable source of video data
Great, if these documents are credible, this is exactly what I was implying[1] yesteday. Here, listen to Altman say how he is "genuinely embarrassed": "this is on me and one of the few times i've been genuinely embarrassed running openai; i did not know this was happening and i should have." The first thing the above conjures up is the other disgraced Sam (Bankman-Fried) saying "this is on me" when FTX went bust. I b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They’re definitely doing this on comments too. I’ve had negative towards altman comments at the top dropped to below the negative voted ones in the past
Wait til you hear what happened to Michael O’Church.
This is the final comment [1] that got Michael’s account banned.
You can see dang’s reply [2] directly underneath his which says:
> We've banned this account.
What is up with the allegations of Annie Altman? Something doesn't smell right
Well, it is wrong to disparage someone that is innocent until proven otherwise. Even if you disagree with them and think they are a snake-oil salesman. That does not mean you should not hear someone out. As far as I am aware Annie said Sam and their brother molested her as a kid. He claims otherwise, and deflects with “she is a drug addict” (heavily paraphrasing here). Lots of talk of how her trust was broken, and it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same. And in the same breath they also added “this is never used anyway, it’s just the template”. But “no it can’t be removed from the contract”
I always respond with "if it's never enforced, then you'll be fine with me taking it out" Then I strike the offending passage out on both copies of the contract, sign and hand it back to them. Your move. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Great, if these documents are credible, this is exactly what I was implying[1] yesteday. Here, listen to Altman say how he is "genuinely embarrassed": "this is on me and one of the few times i've been genuinely embarrassed running openai; i did not know this was happening and i should have." The first thing the above conjures up is the other disgraced Sam (Bankman-Fried) saying "this is on me" when FTX went bust. I b…
Do you really believe he was genuinely embarrassed? All his public statements lately have been just PR BS. Nothing genuine there.
I was trying to be a bit restrained in my criticism; otherwise, it gets too repetitive.
I've learned to interpret anything Sam Altman says as-if an Aes Sedai said it. That is: every word is true, but leads the listener to making false assumptions. Even if in this specific instance he means well, it's still quite entertaining to interpret his statements this way: "we have never clawed back anyone's vested equity" => But we can and will, if we decide to. "nor will we do that if people do not sign a separa…
> We're removing nondisparagement clauses from our standard departure paperwork How would you interpret this part? > and we're releasing former employees from existing nondisparagement obligations unless the nondisparagement provision was mutual. This is interesting - was it mutual for most people?
"We're replacing them with even more draconian terms that are not technically nondisparagement clauses"
> and we're releasing former employees from existing nondisparagement obligations unless the nondisparagement provision was mutual.
"We offered some employees $1 in exchange for signing up to the nondisparagement clause, which technically makes it a binding contract because there was an exchange of value."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s got a term - “garden leave” and yeah it was prevalent in finance. I say “was” because I think some states are changing laws wrt/ non-competes and this calling this practice into question.
The federal government banned non competes last month: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/04/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always respond with "if it's never enforced, then you'll be fine with me taking it out" Then I strike the offending passage out on both copies of the contract, sign and hand it back to them. Your move. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Do you really do this, and is striking out a line of a contract binding?