zlacker

>>jk_tec+(OP)
> I was happily avoiding full time employment. I took this job because I believe that OpenAI is one of the most important companies currently in existence. When the board shared the situation and asked me to take the role, I did not make the decision lightly. Ultimately I felt that I had a duty to help if I could.

An external CEO that's stepping in not because they want to but because they feel they "need" to doesn't sound like a recipe for success.

>>rutier+v9
He's an 'AGI potentially poses an existential threat' guy. He's given his p(doom) as being somewhere between 5 and 50 percent. If the people in charge of potentially making a thing you think could have up to a 50% chance of wiping out humanity are asking you if you can help, you're probably going to offer whatever help you can.

>>cthalu+Tb
With his probability estimates that high, he should probably do everything in his power to stop all development.

>>Random+Mg
He has already indicated that he intends to slow development by over 90%.

>>xvecto+0i
Do you have a reference for that? I'd like to read / view it.

>>Boiled+Vn
I believe this is a reference to Emmett’s Sept 16 [1] post on X:

> I specifically say I’m in favor of slowing down, which is sort of like pausing except it’s slowing down.

> If we’re at a speed of 10 right now, a pause is reducing to 0. I think we should aim for a 1-2 instead.

[1] https://x.com/eshear/status/1703178063306203397?s=20

>>lsicla+Ks
Quite bad news, imagine a CEO trying to slow down his own company instead of pushing it forward :|

>>rvnx+VB
It's almost like they live in a vacuum where there's not a nation in particular with essentially infinite resources and smart people like them that will immediately capitalize on these delays.