zlacker

>>vforgi+(OP)
Reminds me of SBF calling for crypto regulations while running FTX. Being seen as friendly to regulations is great for optics compared to being belligerently anti-regulation. You can appear responsible and benevolent, and get more opportunity to weaken regulation by controlling more of the narrative. And hey, if you get end up getting some regulatory capture making competition harder, that's a great benefit too.

OpenAI != FTX, just meaning to say calling for regulation isn't an indication of good intentions, despite sounding like it.

>>brenns+IQ
Neither is it an indication of bad intentions and I don't even think SBF was dishonest, his general behavior doesn't exactly suggest he's some Machiavellian mastermind.

This is always the first comment when someone in an industry talks about regulation but it doesn't change the fact that it's needed and they're essentially right regardless of what motivations they have.

>>Barrin+2X
" his general behavior doesn't exactly suggest he's some Machiavellian mastermind."

Come on! You don't get to the place he got to by accident. This requires careful planning and ruthless execution. He just faked being the nerdy kid who wants to do good and is surprised by the billions coming to him.

>>rqtwte+6Z
> his general behavior doesn't exactly suggest he's some Machiavellian mastermind

>> don't get to the place he got to by accident

You both agree. Bankman-Fried was a dumb Machiavellian.

>>JumpCr+mZ
being labeled a machiavellian may as well be a label for 'maliciously self-serving', unless you're referring to Machiavelli's work on the 'Discoures on Livy' -- and no one ever is referring to that aspect of Machiavelli when labeling people with the phrase.