The anti-OpenAI brigade on HackerNews has reached Reddit-insanity proportions.
There's no way is this organic
Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
941–950 of 1001 posts
Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#942Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not saying he should not be criticized or even held legally liable for actions. Merely that, you know, fire bombing peoples homes whose actions you disagree with is bad thing. Controversial hot take, I know.
Dysfunctional political systems tend to break the states monopoly on violence.
So why is nobody committing violence against Trump for starting a literal war?
No, because even TALKING about doing anything to the ACTUALLY EVIL people of this world will get your ass wrecked.
Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#943It is fair to be critical of Sam and other tech leaders regarding AI, but he has done nothing to begin to justify violence or even the threat of violence against him or his family.
[flagged]
Words can justify violence. A serious threat of violence is a reasonable basis for acting in self-defense. Another comment said the same about pre-emptive self-defense as if one should wait to be shot at even whilst a gun is pointed at them before shooting back.
Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#944Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#945Didn’t we just go through several weeks of hearing about OpenAI allowing its tech to be used for conducting warfare? Not saying that justifies harming Altman but I am confused that he seems surprised he is now in physical danger? [Or chalks it up to just some single specific incendiary article rather than the companies actual actions?] If you involve yourself in the act of killing people then, yeah, you’re going to g…
The US is still a democracy. It's absolutely ok to oppose war. It is absolutely not ok for "some people to want to hurt" someone who is running a company that is vying for contracts from a democratically elected government's defense department. It's also ok to protest that, to boycott it or to refuse to work for or with them for it. But escalating that to physical violence is not ok, and nor should people be "confuse…
Being able to vote between Moloch and Baʿal is hardly “a democracy”.
Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#946Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#947Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It is absolutely not ok for "some people to want to hurt" someone who is running a company that is vying for contracts from a democratically elected government's defense department. Why though?
I’m falling into the Socratic hole [0], but in a modern civil society there is a justice system through which people seek recourse. This has all sorts of desirable effects for societies. Please educate yourself on the basics or at least put more effort in before participating in conversations. [0]: It’s easy to abuse the Socratic method and devolve a discussion into one of first principles. It’s extremely tiresome an…
No can do, this justice system actually protects war criminals rather than prosecuting them. The US threatened the international justice system by threatening to invade the Hague when it attempted to prosecute American war criminals. It's contradictory to respect the American “justice system” whilest it actively disrespects other justice systems both in other countries and in international law.
Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#948Didn’t we just go through several weeks of hearing about OpenAI allowing its tech to be used for conducting warfare? Not saying that justifies harming Altman but I am confused that he seems surprised he is now in physical danger? [Or chalks it up to just some single specific incendiary article rather than the companies actual actions?] If you involve yourself in the act of killing people then, yeah, you’re going to g…
> Didn’t we just go through several weeks of hearing about OpenAI allowing its tech to be used for conducting warfare? Unfortunately warfare is a thing. Why wouldn't you want the best technology used for your country when conducting warfare? Or do you just believe warfare would cease to exist if a country gave up any means of defense or offense?
I wouldn't want my country to use the best technology when conducting warfare because my country only conducts offensive warfare resulting in millions of innocent deaths in the Middle East, having a massive military budget that dwarfs most others combined whilst hardly ever being directly threatened.
Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#949Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is still a democracy. It's absolutely ok to oppose war. It is absolutely not ok for "some people to want to hurt" someone who is running a company that is vying for contracts from a democratically elected government's defense department. It's also ok to protest that, to boycott it or to refuse to work for or with them for it. But escalating that to physical violence is not ok, and nor should people be "confuse…
Being able to vote between Moloch and Baʿal is hardly “a democracy”.
Those were both good deities before the peoples who replaced their worshippers demonized them:
Some history: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8Q9uyFASF0
Re: Sam Altman's response to Molotov cocktail incident
#950Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being able to vote between Moloch and Baʿal is hardly “a democracy”.
Those were both good deities before the peoples who replaced their worshippers demonized them: Some history: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8Q9uyFASF0
I do know that history actually, I was learning about the Baʿal Cycle last night actually, I'm a huge fan of linguistics and also learning about Semitic Religion. I was using them in the idiomatic sense in which they would usually be understood by the average reader.
I mean, I even went through the effort of expressing the pharyngeal consonant.
Address the spirit of my message rather than the letter please. I perhaps would've used a better expression if I could've thought about it first.