zlacker

[return to "Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI"]
1. brenns+IQ[view] [source] 2023-05-16 15:42:06
>>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.

◧◩
2. Barrin+2X[view] [source] 2023-05-16 16:04:58
>>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.

◧◩◪
3. rqtwte+6Z[view] [source] 2023-05-16 16:13:02
>>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.

◧◩◪◨
4. Barrin+N81[view] [source] 2023-05-16 16:51:38
>>rqtwte+6Z
>Come on! You don't get to the place he got to by accident.

You can literally become president of the US by accident these days. SBF self-reported to a random journalist one day after all hell broke lose with messages so incriminating the reporter had to confirm that it was a real conversation.

Half of the American elite class voluntarily sat on the board of a bogus company just because the woman running it was attractive and wore black turtlenecks. The sad reality is that these people aren't ruthless operators, they're just marginally less clueless than the people who got them into their positions

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. rqtwte+zL1[view] [source] 2023-05-16 19:55:39
>>Barrin+N81
"You can literally become president of the US by accident these days."

Who became president by accident? You may not like them personally or their politics , but I am not aware of any president that didn't put enormous amounts of work and effort over years into becoming president.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. rurp+9P1[view] [source] 2023-05-16 20:12:56
>>rqtwte+zL1
Trump spent a great deal of time during the 2016 campaign setting up projects to cash in on a loss (like a new tv station). This very little sign that he spent time preparing to actually win and serve as president. It wasn't really an outlandish idea either, most presidential candidates these days do it primarily to raise a profile they can cash in on via punditry, books, etc.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. rqtwte+r65[view] [source] 2023-05-17 19:04:57
>>rurp+9P1
Presidential candidates put an enormous effort into winning the campaign. I agree that they don’t spend much time thinking about actual policy. Calling Trump’s win an accident is dangerous. Realistically he put in the work Clinton didn’t because she was too arrogant.
[go to top]