zlacker

>>medler+(OP)
If Altman gets to return, it’s the goodbye of AI ethics within OpenAI and the elimination of the nonprofit. Also, I believe that hiring him back because of “how much he is loved by people within OpenAI” is like forgetting that a corrupt president did what they did. In all honesty, that has precedent, so it wouldn’t be old news. Also, I read a lot of people here saying this is about engineers vs scientists…I believe that people don’t understand that Data Scientists are full stack engineers. Ilya is one. Greg has just been inspiring people and stopped properly coding with the team a long time ago. Sam never did any code and the vision of an AGI comes from Ilya…Even if Mira now sides with Sam, I believe there’s a lot of social pressure for the employees to support Sam and it shouldn’t be like that. Again, I do believe OpenAI was and is a collective effort. But, I wouldn’t treat Sam as the messiah or compare him to Steve Jobs. That’s indecent towards Steve Jobs who was actually a UX designer.

>>mariaa+Xf1
>If Altman gets to return, it’s the goodbye of AI ethics

Any evidence he's unethical? Or just dislike him?

He actually seems to have done more practical stuff like experimenting with UBI, to mitigate AI risk than most people.

>>tim333+wA1
I think the UBI experiment was quite unethical in many ways and I believe it was Altman's brainchild.

https://www.businessinsider.nl/y-combinator-basic-income-tes...

>>jacque+rE1
Okay I'll bite, what's so unethical about giving people money?

>>Hasnep+GT1
Because without a long term plan you are just setting them up for a really hard fall. It is experimenting on people where if the experiment goes wrong you're high and dry in your mansion and they get to be pushed back into something probably worse than where they were before. It ties into the capitalist idea that money can solve all problems whereas in many cases these are healthcare and education issues first and foremost. You don't do that without really thinking through the possible consequences and to ensure that no matter what the outcome it is always going to be a net positive for the people that you decide to experiment on.

>>jacque+OU1
Let me see if I understand, is your argument that you shouldn't give people money because they might make irresponsible financial choices?