zlacker

[return to "A Timeline of the OpenAI Board"]
1. upward+A6[view] [source] 2023-11-19 08:44:50
>>prawn+(OP)
> they asked: who on earth are Tasha McCauley and Helen Toner?

As a prominent researcher in AI safety (I discovered prompt injection) I should explain that Helen Toner is a big name in the AI safety community - she’s one of the top 20 most respected people in our community, like Rohin Shah.

The “who on earth” question is a good question about Tasha. But grouping Helen in with Tasha is just sexist. By analogy, Tasha is like Kimbal Musk, whereas Helen is like Tom Mueller.

Tasha seems unqualified but Helen is extremely qualified. Grouping them together is sexist and wrong.

◧◩
2. peyton+e8[view] [source] 2023-11-19 09:02:57
>>upward+A6
Not seeing the sexism. I think the AI safety community is a little early and notoriety therein probably isn’t sufficient to qualify somebody to direct an $80 bn company.
◧◩◪
3. upward+p9[view] [source] 2023-11-19 09:13:02
>>peyton+e8
The article refers to Tech Twitter, and that’s where the sexism is.

People on Twitter are making degrading memes of her and posting weird, creepy, harassing comments like this: “Why does Helen Toner have shelf tits” https://x.com/smolfeelshaver/status/1726073304136450511?s=46

Search for “Helen Toner” on Twitter and you will see she is being singled out for bullying by a bunch of weird creepy white dudes who I guess apparently work in tech.

> I think the AI safety community is a little early and notoriety therein probably isn’t sufficient to qualify somebody to direct an $80 bn company.

Normally you’d be right. In the specific case of OpenAI, however, their charter requires safety to be the number one priority of their directors, higher than making money or providing stable employment or anything else that a large company normally prioritizes. This is from OpenAI’s site:

“each director must perform their fiduciary duties in furtherance of its mission—safe AGI that is broadly beneficial” https://openai.com/our-structure

◧◩◪◨
4. nemo44+CD[view] [source] 2023-11-19 13:51:07
>>upward+p9
That’s a tweet with <500 views, a number of which I assume is because you linked it.

> weird creepy white dudes…

This is racism. And sexist. How do you know it’s white people or dudes?

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. upward+A81[view] [source] 2023-11-19 16:53:24
>>nemo44+CD
I don’t know about this tweet’s author. I mean that most of the people slandering her on Twitter are white men based on their profile pictures. But you’re right that I still shouldn’t stereotype; I’m sorry.
[go to top]