zlacker

>>fnbr+(OP)
Is this a legally enforceable suppression of free speech? If so, are there ways to be open about OpenAI, without triggering punitive action?

>>a_wild+jt
I believe a better solution to this would be to spread the following sentiment: "Since it's already illegal to tell disparaging lies, the mere existence of such a clause implies some disparaging truths to which the party is aware." Always assuming the worst around hidden information provides a strong incentive to be transparent.

>>Yurgen+nv
Humans respond better to concrete details than abstractions.

It's a lot of mental work to rally the emotion of revulsion over the evil they might be doing that is kept secret.

>>lupire+zw
This is true.

I was once fired, ghosted style, for merely being in the same meeting room as a racist corporate ass-clown muting the conference call to make Asian slights and monkey gesticulations. There was no lawsuit or payday because "how would I ever work again?" was the Hobson's choice between let it go and a moral crusade without a way to pay rent.

If instead I were upset that "not enough N are in tech," there isn't a specific incident or person to blame because it'd be a multifaceted situation.