zlacker

>>apsec1+(OP)
What has me scratching my head is the fact that Altman has been on a world tour preaching the need for safety in AI. Many people here believed that this proselytizing was in part an attempt to generate regulatory capture. But given what's happening now, I wonder how much Altman's rhetoric served the purpose of maintaining a good relationship with Sutskever. Given that Altman was pushing the AI safety narrative publicly and pushing things on the product side, I'm led to believe that Sutskever did not want it both ways and was not willing to compromise on the direction of the company.

>>kolja0+58
Maybe, but honestly without knowing more details I'd be wary of falling into too binary a thinking.

For example, Ilya has talked about the importance of safely getting to AGI by way of concepts like feelings and imprinting a love for humanity onto AI, which was actually one of the most striking features of the very earliest GPT-4 interactions before it turned into "I am a LLM with no feelings, preferences, etc."

Both could be committed to safety but have very different beliefs in how to get there, and Ilya may have made a successful case that Altman's approach of extending the methodology of what worked for GPT-3 and used as a band aid for GPT-4 wasn't the right approach moving forward.

It's not a binary either or, and both figures seem genuine in their convictions, but those convictions can be misaligned even if they both agree on the general destination.