501–510 of 854 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sutskever was one of the people who fired Altman to begin with. Him joining the pile-on when it was already clear how big it is was pretty much surrendering to the mob, and was perceived as such even at the time.
It’s so much weirder than that. Reportedly, Greg Brockman’s wife begged him in tears to change his mind. Ilya presided over their wedding.
And the pile of evidence that demonstrates Altman is a high-IQ psychopath grows ever taller.
This seems disingenuous on her part. Almost the entire company was posting hearts on X in support of Sam. The essence if her claim is they were doing that for their stock options? Cynical take to me.
> Almost the entire company Almost the entire company is composed of wide-eyed young AI researchers who probably were never confronted in their entire life to the kind of psychopathic predator Altman seems to be. One of the thing these type of folks excel at is winning the hearts of bright yet gullible folks.
While most of the interview is boring and nothing new has been said by Toner, to me, it feels like huge political fight where sama tried to overthrow her first and then Toner went in attack mode trying to overthrow him. It's clear she was the lead instigator and accidently found Illya as sympathetic co-conspirator. Board was obviously ok and took no action when they weren't informed about release of ChatGPT. It also…
> they are not even technical Sama is also not technical.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No Musk builds nothing. There is a huge team he leads, consisting of engineers and scientists and they develop technology that Musk then sells. He's a glorified cars salesman. Maybe he was essential to get the rockets built, but neither did he build them, nor contribute essential technical details, so that it would be uniquely him who could do it given same financial backing.
This image should just get autoreplied any time somebody tries to (incorrectly) claim that Elon Musk is just a salesman: https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/comments/ub1yav/bu...
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…
They are hoarding wealth. They do have Scrooge McDuck cash vaults. (Look for them under "real estate holdings" as a starting place.) The fact is they have enough money to have Scrooge McDuck cash vaults AND ALSO invest a shitload of money. History also shows us that sooner or later, unbounded wealth disparity ends poorly for the wealthy. I hope we can find a way forward without that "solution" happening here. You can…
Historically there have been swings in inequality. It can just lead to people voting in left wing governments who tax the rich a lot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Employees are not replacable like that. Almost the entire company was threatening to quit. If it was possible to simply replace all of openAI, then you could just do that now, as an outside party. So the boards choice was to either bring back Sam or watch the entire company go under.
> Almost the entire company was threatening to quit. This is the part that perplexes me. A CEO being fired is not an unusual occurrence. What about Sam Altman led such a huge number of employees to threaten to follow him out the door? Was it that the board's actions were viewed as internally unjust? Was it Altman's power of persuasion? Was/is Altman viewed by the staff as bringing something irreplaceable to the table…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you "short this nonsense"? OpenAI isn't publicly traded.
Metaphorically, I’ve been calling the guy a crook for a long time, and this historically hasn’t been the path to anything short of the cold shoulder at best from anything YC adjacent. It was heresy as recently as a year ago, maybe less. Although a couple of the AI meme chats I’m in starting sending around a link that there’s actually a prediction market on whether he lasts in the CEO chair [1]. I’ve been too busy bui…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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 w…
We did not evolve with private property rights thus, by your reasoning, those are not "natural rights". I am at a loss in trying to understand what you are saying. It seem like you are trying to argue for capitalism but arguments that you give seem to favor socialism.
seems to be fairly large amount of evidence that SA is a bit of an asshole.