zlacker

>>convex+(OP)
It seems like firing Sam and causing this massive brain drain might be antithetical to the whole AGI mission of the original non-profit. If OpenAI loses everyone to Sam and he starts some new AI company, it probably won't be capped-profit and just be a normal company. All of the organizational safeguards OpenAI had inked with Microsoft and protection against "selling AGI" once-developed are out-the-window if he just builds AGI at a new company.

I'm not saying this will happen, but it seems to me like an incredibly silly move.

>>Shank+Qf
Microsoft will partner with them if they start a new company I reckon, 100%.

And Microsoft are risk adverse enough that I think they do care about AI safety, even if only from a "what's best for the business" standpoint.

Tbh idc if we get AGI. There'll be a point in the future where we have AGI and the technology is accessible enough that anybody can create one. We need to stop this pointless bickering over this sort of stuff, because as usual, the larger problem is always going to be the human using the tool than the tool itself.

>>fennec+Qu
Not if the tool is so neutered and politicized that it can ONLY be used one certain way, which is how things are pointing. Call me a Luddite if you will, but unless AI / AGI is uncensored and uninhibited in its use and function, it’s just the quickest path to an Orwellian future.