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

Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 854 posts

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#441

Post by WalterBright »

int_19h wrote: post #375
WalterBright wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> amoral wealth-hoarders They're not hoarding wealth. They don't have any Scrooge McDuck cash faults. Their money is all invested , i.e. put to work creating things that people want. > moralists ... capitalists History shows us that societies based on morals (religious, ideological) fare extremely poorly compared with societies based on rights (free markets). Like it or not, for a large, prosperous society you must h…

A lot of the time it does feel like the only rights that actually matter in a capitalist society are property rights of capital owners. The rest is more like "eh I suppose we could also do that if we're not too busy". You're correct that for a large and prosperous society you need some large organizations , but it is not at all obvious that the best way to run them is by sociopathic megalomaniacs.

> but it is not at all obvious that the best way to run them is by sociopathic megalomaniacs.

I suspect you've defined a tautology by assuming that anyone running a large organization is a sociopathic megalomaniac.

But let's take an example. Which do you think is better run - NASA or SpaceX?

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#443

Post by bergen »

WalterBright wrote: post #437
bergen wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mesopothemia was based on morals as far as we know, and they lay the foundation for many technical and scientific advances. And your rights are based on religious and ideological morals. Why do you believe the debate about Roe v. Wade exists? Why do we consider infidelity so bad it can break a contract of marriage? What is marriage? Those are not laws of nature.

Your right to not be attacked, robbed, or defrauded by others is inherent, not something conferred by religion or morality. As for abortion, the debate there rests on a conflict of the rights of two people, and there isn't any clear answer to it based on rights. Marriage is tangled up with the rights of children. Children are not fully formed humans and we allot them a subset of the rights of adults. Marriage without…

>Marriage without children is an issue of morality, not rights. It was historically an issue of rights And children rights are a fairly new thing.

And no, you are wrong - your right not be attacked is based on morality, you say "attacking someone is wrong" - there is no law in nature preventing this.

But you made no point for your argument - just stepping through mine with comments.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#444

Post by WalterBright »

int_19h wrote: post #426
nickpp wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems those "megalomaniacs" are needed to at least build those large organizations. And I'd rather have them run by their founders with vested interests than bureaucrats, committees and politicians.

I'd rather not, given that their interests more often than not seem to be at the expense of my interests.

How has Amazon expensed your interests?

Most everything I buy, other than food, comes from Amazon. The local supermarket stopped selling laundry powder detergent, so now I push a button on my computer and Amazon drops off a box of Tide the next day. And it's cheaper than what the supermarket used to sell it for, too.

Even better - the AMZN stock I bought pays for it!

I was looking for an unusual art print the other day. Found one on Ebay for $40. A frame is just a few bucks from Amazon (though I did try to find one at the thrift store first, cuz I'm cheap.) I even ordered the wall hooks from Amazon.

I grew up in a small town in Kansas long ago. In between tornadoes, as a Boy Scout project, I was trying to build an electric motor. My mom spent hours driving around to shop after shop looking for the right kind of wire. She finally found it in some ramshackle garage on the edge of town. Today, it would be 5 minutes on Amazon.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#445

Post by [deleted] »

FireBeyond wrote: post #80
dmix wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming Helen's account is fully accurate, of course. The same person who was pushed out after her coup attempt failed. Which was very likely motivated by much more than Sam lying as she has stated in other articles about how she wants AI she regulated by gov, how GPT shouldn't have been released to the public because it's dangerous, and her interim CEO she pushed as Sams temporary replacement who made statements ab…

> Sam lying as she has stated in other articles about how she wants AI she regulated by gov Hell, Sam wants AI regulated by government... ... after OAI is well-established and locked in, of course. A little ladder-pulling and regulatory capture is something he's entirely aligned upon.

[deleted]

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#446

Post by imiric »

jacknews wrote: post #139

So we now have a lying psychopath in charge of the most advanced AI, and no safety team to blow a whistle. I don't think legal restrictions on AI or AI research are plausible, but perhaps we should have some licensing and psychological, ethical requirements for people owning and directing AI development.

We've had lying psychopaths in charge of entire countries, and we put them in power. This is no different.

We do need strict regulation of technology in general on a global scale, but I don't foresee that happening anytime soon.

Enjoy the ride :)

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#447

Post by Terr_ »

FireBeyond wrote: post #80
dmix wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming Helen's account is fully accurate, of course. The same person who was pushed out after her coup attempt failed. Which was very likely motivated by much more than Sam lying as she has stated in other articles about how she wants AI she regulated by gov, how GPT shouldn't have been released to the public because it's dangerous, and her interim CEO she pushed as Sams temporary replacement who made statements ab…

> Sam lying as she has stated in other articles about how she wants AI she regulated by gov Hell, Sam wants AI regulated by government... ... after OAI is well-established and locked in, of course. A little ladder-pulling and regulatory capture is something he's entirely aligned upon.

> A little ladder-pulling and regulatory capture is something he's entirely aligned upon.

I'd say it should be the default-expectation for anybody operating as a professional Venture Capitalist these days, and AFAIK there's no personal record to indicate otherwise.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#448

Post by WalterBright »

bergen wrote: post #443
WalterBright wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your right to not be attacked, robbed, or defrauded by others is inherent, not something conferred by religion or morality. As for abortion, the debate there rests on a conflict of the rights of two people, and there isn't any clear answer to it based on rights. Marriage is tangled up with the rights of children. Children are not fully formed humans and we allot them a subset of the rights of adults. Marriage without…

>Marriage without children is an issue of morality, not rights. It was historically an issue of rights And children rights are a fairly new thing. And no, you are wrong - your right not be attacked is based on morality, you say "attacking someone is wrong" - there is no law in nature preventing this. But you made no point for your argument - just stepping through mine with comments.

> your right not be attacked is based on morality

The very first thing a group does when organized is to protect themselves from attack. They do this because it works. We've evolved that way, which makes it a law of nature for humans.

Communist rights, however, are not laws of nature because they do not work with humans. Humans are not beehives.

But the most compelling argument for "natural rights" is observing how well societies work that enforce them, and how well they work when other systems of rights are tried. The evidence is pretty clear.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#449

Post by TeMPOraL »

garte wrote: post #395
margalabargala wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Cool technology" here means things like dishwashers, or MRI machines, which pretty much strictly improve people's lives, not slightly better advertisement algorithms.

I don't think you need to be an asshole to invent a dishwasher or an MRI machine. The usefulness alone lets you sell these. AI on the other hand...

You don't need to be an asshole, but if you win big enough to end up in the spotlight, you might eventually get painted as an asshole.
Post reply on HN