zlacker

>>davidb+(OP)
Is there any downside whatsoever for OpenAI/Sam to be the one proposing/leading the calls for regulation? Cynics will say they are trying to pull the ladder up from underneath them, so this is massively beneficial for them. What's the downside (if any)? Getting a small subset of the community mad doesn't seem like a lot of downside.

>>immich+93
Whether there's a downside is moot since no one knows how to do any sort of regulation effectively.

That being said, I don't know why you think that only a small community will see this as self-serving. It's not subtle even though it may be unavoidable.

>>mhb+e5
To clarify, everyone will see this as self-serving? But I don't think most people will do anything concrete about it. At most -- even the hardcore haters will just complain loudly on Twitter. How many people would purposely choose to not use an OpenAI product? Very few IMO.

>>immich+Ue
Ah yes. I agree no one will boycott OpenAI or something like that and that wouldn't stop its competitors anyway. That's why any optimism about the outcome seems unwarranted. All the incentives are aligned for developing better AI as quickly as possible. It's almost certainly being developed clandestinely as well, so, arguably, it may be good for OpenAI to get there first.