Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI has deleted the word 'safely' from its mission

theconversation.com

91–100 of 316 posts

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

#91
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The leaders of these LLM companies should be held criminally liable for their products in the same way that regular people would be if they did the same thing. We've got to stop throwing up our hands and shrugging when giant corporations are evil

Regular people would not be held liable for this. It would be a dubious case even if a human helped another human to do this.

Regular people don't have global reach and influence over humanity's agency, attention, beliefs, politics and economics.

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

#92
post #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.

> We're already replacing ChatGPT by Claude or Gemini

Maybe "we", but certainly not "I". Gemini Web is a huge piece of turd and shouldn't even be used in the same sentence as ChatGPT and Claude.

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

#95
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

May you never need to be in a bereaved parent's shoes.

Many of us aren't, and it's why it's hard to blame the businesses like OpenAI for doing nothing.

The parent's jokey tone is unwarranted, but their overall point is sound. The more blame we assign to inanimate systems like ChatGPT, the more consent we furnish for inhumane surveillance.

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

#96
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The leaders of these LLM companies should be held criminally liable for their products in the same way that regular people would be if they did the same thing. We've got to stop throwing up our hands and shrugging when giant corporations are evil

Regular people would not be held liable for this. It would be a dubious case even if a human helped another human to do this.

A therapist might face major consequences

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

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://archive.is/fuJCe (Apologies if this archive link isn't helpful, the unlocked_article_code in the URL still resulted in a paywall on my side...)

We probably shouldn't be using the "archive" site that hijacks your browser into DDOSing other people. I'm actually surprised HN hasn't banned it.

Some of us have, and some of us still use it. The functionality and the need for an archive not subject to the same constraints as the wayback machine and other institutions outweighs the blackhat hijinks and bickering between a blogger and the archive.is person/team.

My own ethical calculus is that they shouldn't be ddos attacking, but on the other hand, it's the internet equivalent of a house egging, and not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. It probably got gyrovague far more attention than they'd have gotten otherwise, so maybe they can cash in on that and thumb their nose at the archive.is people.

Regardless - maybe "we" shouldn't be telling people what sites to use or not use -if you want to talk morals and ethics, then you better stop using gmail, amazon, ebay, Apple, Microsoft, any frontier AI, and hell, your ISP has probably done more evil things since last tuesday than the average person gets up to in a lifetime, so no internet, either. And totally forget about cellular service. What about the state you live in, or the country? Are they appropriately pure and ethical, or are you going to start telling people they need to defect to some bastion of ethics and nobility?

Real life is messy. Purity tests are stupid. Use archive.is for what it is, and the value it provides which you can't get elsewhere, for as long as you can, because once they're unmasked, that sort of thing is gone from the internet, and that'd be a damn shame.

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

#98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We probably shouldn't be using the "archive" site that hijacks your browser into DDOSing other people. I'm actually surprised HN hasn't banned it.

Oof TIL, thanks for the heads up that's a shame! https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/417269/archive-toda... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment... https://gyrovague.com/2026/02/01/archive-today-is-directing-...

[deleted]

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

#100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://archive.is/fuJCe (Apologies if this archive link isn't helpful, the unlocked_article_code in the URL still resulted in a paywall on my side...)

We probably shouldn't be using the "archive" site that hijacks your browser into DDOSing other people. I'm actually surprised HN hasn't banned it.

I’d be happy if people stop linking to paywalled sites in the first place. There’s usually a small blog on the same topic and ironically the small blogs poster here are better quality.

But otherwise, without an alternative, the entire thread becomes useless. We’d have even more RTFA, degrading the site even for people who pay for the articles. I much prefer keeping archive.today to that.

Post reply on HN