991–1000 of 1001 posts
It's never OK to physically attack someone like this. Full stop. Separately; Sam's belief that "AI has to be democratized; power cannot be too concentrated." rings incredibly hollow. OpenAI has abandoned its open source roots. It is concentrating wealth - and thus power - into fewer hands. Not more.
Like this, for sure not. And Sam has not, even with that article, done anything to warrant violence.
What article is he referencing in the fourth paragraph? The New Yorker one? I got the impression that it was careful in its reporting and by no means one-sided. Seems pretty sleazy for him to associate that (based on no evidence!) with the violent attack.
A molotov thrown at a gate seems more symbolic than directly violent to my eyes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These comments have gone beyond Reddit levels and reached Facebook insanity levels.
I simply don't understand how somebody able to enjoy modern comforts precisely because of innovations resulting in job eliminations will suddenly draw the line when AI might risk some jobs.
Whether that's good societally is a different question. Is it good FOR THOSE PEOPLE from their perspective? Of course it's not, and that should be painfully obvious to everyone here.
So then, why are we playing stupid and acting surprised when Altman is in danger? Everyone should have saw this coming.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
These comments have gone beyond Reddit levels and reached Facebook insanity levels.
I'm not saying altman is actually a murderer or that AI is even bad for society as a whole.
I'm saying that what he is saying is directly threatening to a lot of people, and it should be obvious that some of those people will lash out.
Something being good for society can still be bad for you. If you're someone who altman is bragging about making redundant, then you might be mad at altman. It's very simple reasoning.
There are people actively insinuating in this thread that Sam should be...killed, and they are still up. Very odd moderation, surely there is a better way to flag these things.
I'd like to see specific links.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what is the game plan for society moving forward as AI takes more jobs > What happens when more and more people can't afford housing, kids, food, health insurance, etc.? What about when the opposite of this all happens, society massively benefits, and unemployment rates stay about what they have always been? Will people still be yelling about the doomsday of societial collapse that has failed to materialize every s…
How would society benefit if all the benefit collects to the top of the pyramid? Same old trickle down? The technology isn’t inherently bad but if it comes with massive unemployment and creates social unrest while a few at the top profit… That’s what is what makes me uncomfortable.
The same way that society has already benefited and continues to benefit from everything.
Wealth across all income brackets continues to go up.
> That’s what is what makes me uncomfortable.
Then you are uncomfortable about something that isn't happening.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd like to see specific links.
It seems you or the team have culled many of them. There was one in particular that stood out but it seems to have been removed or they are heavily buried now. I just saw your post further down the thread, so you have seen them and I assume action was taken, thanks. There are still some that I find distasteful, but not as bad as what I was originally seeing towards the top.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modern Corporations (capitalized for some reason) are a failure because they don't care about your elephant allegory and that somehow relates to to the current article?
I'm all for values not necessarily pro big-corp but if a corporation manages to pull in billions of funding before even showing profits, I'd argue that as a strong win and not a "failed experiment" - it's risk money anyway, even if it fails it was worth the risk or they wouldn't have invested.