Boss of OpenAI calls for a regulatory light touch because of the ‘good stuff’ the technology can deliver

Boss of OpenAI calls for a regulatory light touch because of the ‘good stuff’ the technology can deliver

The chief executive of OpenAI cited hacks, scams and “other bad things that will happen” in an interview that sparked an instant backlash from critics of the big AI companies. His comments came after one of his company’s safety experts resigned, saying at the weekend that its “culture is broken”.

In an interview released on Monday, Altman was asked about how OpenAI’s approach to safety differed from that of Anthropic, which has called for the industry to slow down after one of its researchers quit, warning that AI experts believed “it could kill us all by the end of the decade”.

“I think there’s a lot of daylight,” Altman said. “One of the differences between us and some of the stricter AI safety people is that we believe that the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology and people having the agency [to use AI widely].

  • Lucius_Sweet@lemmy.world
    2·
    2 days ago

    The original comment stated “alleged SA”, note the careful language stating the allegation that this case is all about, not a wild accusation that the man is a paedophille or a rapist. Wild allegations are your thing buddy.

    Stop with the logical fallacy arguments if you yourself tend to be expert at using them.

    I’m not even sure what this sentence is trying to say, is English your first language? If you are asking me to stop making you look a fool and a hypocrite by using your own words against you, why should I?

    Did you just say I’m just a woman on period?

    The fact that you even had to ask this makes me wonder if you dressed yourself this morning or needed the assistance of a carer.

    • REDACTED@infosec.pub
      11·
      2 days ago

      The original comment stated "alleged SA

      Exactly. This means that they’re likely talking about the case, the allegations/accusations. I then commented ON THAT CASE that it looks weak. Anyone who then starts getting personal (you were the first to insult me, which prompted my “listen here you little shit” comment) instead of staying objective implies you truly believe the accusations before trial has happened. That sounds like you. I was also quite clear on my position (that I want altman to lose), but I’m not going to start lying to myself. If new evidence is going to get presented, then obviously it would change how strong the case looks. Are you starting to understand? Please never work as a lawyer.