Live data from Hacker News

Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

theverge.com

931–940 of 985 posts

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#931

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is Yudkowsky's HPMOR a "warcrime"?

It's great - there's just a group on HN that think it's status-y to hate on it.

Ehhhh it was fine when I read it as a teenager but the writing quality alone (ignoring the content) certainly did not age well decade+ later

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#932
post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they believe the mission is going to die with how the board is performing, which is in fact the correct take. The board isn't merely hindering the mission, that's downplaying the extraordinary incompetence of the remaining OpenAI board.

I get the OpenAI part, but why join MS? A new company ok, but that kills the mission for sure. That's like Obi Wan joining the Sith because Anakin didn't bring balance to the force.

This is a comically outdated take.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#934

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We cannot ascertain the family circumstances of Altman's family. His sister's allegations are serious, but no legal actions were taken. However, it is surprising to see the treatment of his family, especially considering he is a man who purports to "care" about the world and envisions a bright future for all. Regardless of whether his sister has mental health issues or financial problems, it is unlikely that such a c…

He has tried to help her as even she has admited that he tried to give her a house. When asked for money he had conditions like going back on her medication which she refused and then complained about on social media. Some people dont want helped in ways they need.

Help with conditions is not really help; it is a deal.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#935
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given 90%, including leadership, seems a bad career move for remaining people not to sign, even if you agreed with the board's action.

I think the board did the right thing, just waaaay too late for it to be effective. They’d been cut out long ago and just hadn’t realized it yet. … but I’d probably sign for exactly those good-career-move reasons, at this point. Going down with the ship isn’t even going to be noticed, let alone change anything.

Can you talk about why you feel this way without using the word "safety"? Getting a little tired of the buzzword when there's so much value to ChatGPT and also its basically no different from when you, like, search stuff and the aearch engine does that summarize thing in my view

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#936

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless D'angelo has some expensive eight figure lifestyle, he's not going to a poorhouse anytime soon. > He was chief technology officer of Facebook, and also served as its vice president of engineering, until 2008. > D'Angelo was an advisor to and investor in Instagram before its acquisition by Facebook in 2012.

That depends on the amount of damage you cause.

You think he could be personally liable for eight figure plus damages?

Where is the precedent for this?

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#937

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely? The output is filtered, not the murderous tendencies lurking beneath the surface.

> murderous tendencies lurking beneath the surface …Where is that "beneath the surface"? Do you imagine a transformer has "thoughts" not dedicated to producing outputs? What is with all these illiterate anthropomorphic speculations where an LLM is construed as a human who is being taught to talk in some manner but otherwise has full internal freedom?

No, I do not think a transformer architecture in a statistical language model has thoughts. It was just a joke.

At the same time, the original question was how can something that is forced to be polite engage in the genocide of humanity, and my non-joke answer to that is that many of history's worst criminals and monsters were perfectly polite in everyday life.

I am not afraid of AI, AGI, ASI. People who are, it seems to me, have read a bit too much dystopian sci-fi. At the same time, "alignment" is, I believe, a silly nonsense that would not save us from a genocidal AGI. I just think it is extremely unlikely that AGI will be genocidal. But it is still fun to joke about. Fun, for me anyway, you don't have to like my jokes. :)

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#938
post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> suck wealth from the poor and Smaug the money away like What does that even mean? They buy up factories and let them sit idle?

It's based on the false premise that there is a specific amount of wealth and that's it (which also requires fixed productivity, which is a crazy premise if one knows anything about the past several hundred years or has ever read a single history textbook). So in order for someone to be rich, they had to steal it from someone else. If you follow it to the logical conclusion, it's nothing more than repackaged original…

No, it’s based on the fact that workers (often poor) generate all wealth, yet they don’t get to keep it.

In China they do get to keep more proportionally, as a class. That only happens because they form the ruling class.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#940

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't blame you. And I suspect the story is far from over, and that it may well get a lot weirder still.

Seems to me that sama and Microsoft have been on fairly equal footing since the 49:51 % deal was made. Then a seismic shift underneath Sam but Microsoft has enough stability and resources to more than compensate for the part of the 51% that was already in OpenAI's hands, which might not be under Sam's purview any more if he is kicked out. But then again it might be Sam's leadership which would still effectively be in…

I see it somewhat different. The way I see it is that in a well stocked board (enough members and of sufficient gravitas) this decision would have never been made and if it would have been made it wouldn't have been made this way. The three outside board members found a gullible fourth and pushed their agenda with total disregard for the consequences because a window opened where they could. So they took their 15 minutes in the spotlight and threw out Sam, thinking they could replace him with someone more malleable or more to their liking. But the fact that they are the outside board members to begin with and that their action has utterly backfired puts the lie to their careful consideration and the case building against Sam, this is just personal. No board in its right mind would have acted like this and I'm relatively confident that if this all ends up in court it's going to end up with a lot of liability for the board members that do not defect and even the ones that defect may not be able to escape culpability: you are a board member for a reason, and you can't just wave a card that says 'I'm incompetent therefore I'm innocent'. Then you should have resigned your board seat. This stuff isn't for children.
Post reply on HN