zlacker

"In practice, board bylaws and common sense mean that individuals ... don't do stupid shit."

Were you watching a different show than the rest of us?

>>iandan+(OP)
And we're seeing the result in real-time. Stupid shit doers have been replaced with hopefully-less-stupid-shit-doers.

It's a real shame too, because this is a clear loss for the AI Alignment crowd.

I'm on the fence about the whole alignment thing, but at least there is a strong moral compass in the field- especially compared to something like crypto.

>>iandan+(OP)
No, this is the part of the show where the patronizing rhetoric gets trotted out to rationalize discarding the principles that have suddenly become inconvenient for the people with power.

>>iandan+(OP)
I get a lostredditor vibe way too often here. Oddly more than Reddit.

I think people forget sometimes that comments come with a context. If we are having a conversation about Deep Water Horizon someone will chime in about how safe deep sea oil exploration is and how many failsafes blah blah blah.

“Do you know where you are right now?”

>>hinkle+94
Its a more technical space then reddit. Youre gonna have more know it alls spewing

>>hinkle+94
>I think people forget sometimes that comments come with a context.

I mean, this is definitely one of my pet peeves, but the wider context of this conversation is specifically a board doing stupid shit, so that's a very relevant counterexample to the thing being stated. Board members in general often do stupid/short-sighted shit (especially in tech), and I don't know of any examples of corporate board members recusing themselves.

>>LordDr+n8
Common example of recusal is CEO comp when the CEO is on the board.

>>hinkle+94
So?

>>hinkle+94
I get what you're saying, but I also live in the world and see the mechanics of capitalism. I may be a person who's interested in tech, science, education, archeology, etc. That doesn't mean that I don't also have political views that sometimes overlap with a lot of other very-online people.

I think the comment to which you replied has a very reddit vibe, no doubt. But also, it's a completely valid point. Could it have been said differently? Sure. But I also immediately agreed with the sentiment.

>>mhluon+9d
That's what I would term a black-and-white case. I don't think there's anyone with sense who would argue in good faith that a CEO should get a vote on their own salary. There are many degrees of grey between outright corruption and this example, and I think the concern lies within.

>>badlog+32
> at least there is a strong moral compass in the field

Is this still true when the board gets overhauled after trying to uphold the moral compass.

>>hinkle+94
I apologize, the comment's irony overwhelmed my snark containment system.

>>alsetm+Mi
Oh I wasn’t complaining about the parent, I was complaining it needed to be said.

We are talking about a failure of the system, in the context of a concrete example. Talking about how the system actually works is only appropriate if you are drawing specific arguments up about how this situation is an anomaly, and few of them do that.

Instead it often sounds like “it’s very unusual for the front to fall off”.

>>iandan+(OP)
You need to be able to separate macro-level and micro-level. GP is responding to a comment about the IRS caring about the conflict-of-interest on paper. The IRS has to make and follow rules at a macro level. Micro-level events obviously can affect the macro view, but you don't completely ignore the macro because something bad happened at the micro level. That's how you get knee-jerk reactionary governance, which is highly emotional.

>>alsetm+wj
And when the CEO's other thing is a cryptocurrency?

>>iandan+(OP)
Yes, and we were also watching the thousands and thousands of companies where these types of conflicts are handled easily by decent people and common sense. Don't confuse the outlier with the silent majority.

>>jjoona+v3
No worries. The same kind of people who devoted their time and energy to creating open-source operating systems in the era of Microsoft and Apple are now devoting their time and energy to doing the same for non-lobotomized LLMs.

Look at these clowns (Ilya & Sam and their angry talkie-bot), it's a revelation, like Bill Gates on Linux in 2000:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N36wtDYK8kI

>>Juicyy+58
You know that know-it-all should be hyphenated, right?

…

;)

>>iandan+Um
This comment is perfectionXD

>>saalwe+i91
Sama’s moral compass clearly has north pointing at money and that will definitely get him to a different destination.

>>jjoona+v3
No, its the part of the show where they go back to providing empty lip service to the principles and using them as a pretext for things that actually serve narrow proprietary interests, the same way they were before the leadership that has been doing that for a long time was temporarily removed until those sharing the proprietary interests revolted for a return to the status quo ante.

>>LordDr+n8
It happens a lot. Every big company has CEOs from other businesses on its board and sometimes those businesses will have competing products or services.

Eric Schmidt on Apple’s board is the example that immediately came to my mind. https://www.apple.com/ca/newsroom/2009/08/03Dr-Eric-Schmidt-...