You need to quickly submit a letter to the Economist along the lines of your post today. In my experience, the Economist takes letters seriously, particularly from people of your stature.
What’s really jarring and scary about Altman is that his public persona: nice, do-gooder, wouldn’t hurt a fly type of guy, seems totally at odds with his actions.
Dissolving the 501(c)3 corporation, or at least its status, is a good step, but one that doesn't address the safely concerns. I'm not sure there is a regulatory framework for what is needed here. There used to be something called "regulated industries." I remember taking that course in law school in long ago times. Even the concept of a regulated industry is now completely unknown, something akin to a regulatory version of a trilobite.
I can tell you from the viewpoint of someone who spent the bulk of a sixty year career dealing with safety and security that I see absolutely nothing in the backgrounds of these two gentlemen that would indicate the slightest grasp of either safety or security.
I agree with "Of course, there is a connection between safety and candor, and an obvious one at that: if Altman can’t be trusted, safety could become a serious issue. The failure of two members of the new board (include Taylor, who chairs that Board) to draw that connection, coupled with their misdirection and unfair attack on Toner, is absolutely terrifying."
One way to tackle this problem could be to strengthen whistleblower laws. Anybody knows more about this?
"Sam" is a sociopath. Unfortunately, like so many CEOs. Especially those of big tech, but let us not forget big tobacco, big oil, private equity, banking, agricultural commodities...This behaviour is what the current form of capitalism rewards. Check behaviours against a trusted source:
Just look at the list of behaviours and start a check list for Altman , Musk, Nadella, et al.
Leaving aside the "anthropocene" for a minute, we are fully experiencing what could be called "sociopathalism" as a socioeconomic model.
In total agreement with Gary that AGI armageddon is not the real threat. The real threat is that we allow a bunch of profit-seeking and ego-seeking sociopaths dictate policy to our governments.
When people feel that their grip on power and possible self wealth may be threatened, they always turn ruthless. It’s a sad fact with certain types of human sadly. On all seriousness, are there not enough qualified people like yourself that can set up an alternative org?
"if Altman can’t be trusted, safety could become a serious issue" but now that he's at the head of their new safety committee, problem solved, right? What could go wrong?.... Right?.... Guys?
Early stage company Boards have mostly been stooges of the CEO/founder, but with Elon and Sam that has been elevated to new heights. As well, while Toner and McCauley seem like very progressive choices for board members, dressing the company to look diverse and willing to open up to new perspectives, by replacing them with Taylor and Summers, seems like they’re going back to the tried and true formula of bringing in board members “who know how to tow the company line” 😉
You need to quickly submit a letter to the Economist along the lines of your post today. In my experience, the Economist takes letters seriously, particularly from people of your stature.
I am in touch with them.
Honestly, just fuck these guys. The ego, hubris and god complex need checked, and fast.
But nothing will happen unless we organize and do something about it.
that’s *exactly* why I wrote Taming Silicon Valley. ping me in a couple weeks
What’s really jarring and scary about Altman is that his public persona: nice, do-gooder, wouldn’t hurt a fly type of guy, seems totally at odds with his actions.
He is the Jay Leno of AI CEOs.
Dissolving the 501(c)3 corporation, or at least its status, is a good step, but one that doesn't address the safely concerns. I'm not sure there is a regulatory framework for what is needed here. There used to be something called "regulated industries." I remember taking that course in law school in long ago times. Even the concept of a regulated industry is now completely unknown, something akin to a regulatory version of a trilobite.
Risk (for whom) / Benefit (for whom) a pertinent question indeed ..
Wait, the new board are backing Altman? After the last board was dissolved for not backing Altman? Say it ain't so!
I can tell you from the viewpoint of someone who spent the bulk of a sixty year career dealing with safety and security that I see absolutely nothing in the backgrounds of these two gentlemen that would indicate the slightest grasp of either safety or security.
I agree with "Of course, there is a connection between safety and candor, and an obvious one at that: if Altman can’t be trusted, safety could become a serious issue. The failure of two members of the new board (include Taylor, who chairs that Board) to draw that connection, coupled with their misdirection and unfair attack on Toner, is absolutely terrifying."
One way to tackle this problem could be to strengthen whistleblower laws. Anybody knows more about this?
SB-1047 strengthens whistleblower protections.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB1047
"Sam" is a sociopath. Unfortunately, like so many CEOs. Especially those of big tech, but let us not forget big tobacco, big oil, private equity, banking, agricultural commodities...This behaviour is what the current form of capitalism rewards. Check behaviours against a trusted source:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/antisocial-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20353928
Just look at the list of behaviours and start a check list for Altman , Musk, Nadella, et al.
Leaving aside the "anthropocene" for a minute, we are fully experiencing what could be called "sociopathalism" as a socioeconomic model.
In total agreement with Gary that AGI armageddon is not the real threat. The real threat is that we allow a bunch of profit-seeking and ego-seeking sociopaths dictate policy to our governments.
And that a profit-seeking, ego-seeking sociopath and now convicted felon take a hold of our government.
The Board members seem to be confused about their responsibilities. They manage Altman, not vice versa
When people feel that their grip on power and possible self wealth may be threatened, they always turn ruthless. It’s a sad fact with certain types of human sadly. On all seriousness, are there not enough qualified people like yourself that can set up an alternative org?
Kudos. Succint & to the point !
Just as a side note https://www.theverge.com/24066646/ai-electricity-energy-watts-generative-consumption
Has Larry Summers ever been on the right side of an issue he’s spoken publicly about?
is that true? https://www.nongaap.com/p/openai-startup-fund-gp-hallucination. OpenAI startup fund was so weird. https://www.openai.fund/news/converge-2, they supposed to start on March 11th. we also applied, received submission confirmation, but never heard back from them. apparently, we are not the only one. https://community.openai.com/t/what-ever-happened-to-converge-2/677966/8
"if Altman can’t be trusted, safety could become a serious issue" but now that he's at the head of their new safety committee, problem solved, right? What could go wrong?.... Right?.... Guys?
Early stage company Boards have mostly been stooges of the CEO/founder, but with Elon and Sam that has been elevated to new heights. As well, while Toner and McCauley seem like very progressive choices for board members, dressing the company to look diverse and willing to open up to new perspectives, by replacing them with Taylor and Summers, seems like they’re going back to the tried and true formula of bringing in board members “who know how to tow the company line” 😉
Useful