Sam Altman says people 'right to be afraid' but should trust AI firms
CEO said a thing! Another CEO said a slightly different thing!
Karl Bode143(journalist offers no context or independent expert insight into whether anything being said is actually true)
OPSECtarian12If not grift, why grift-shaped?
Titan Wolf 🔜 ANW8The headlines on these do not do the attempted narrative justice. Sam wants regulation of OTHER peoples' companies, not his. It is a not so veiled attempt to get the government to protect him from competition. Would be great if that was called out.
EK4I saw a clip of him saying that on tv this morning. 🤮 We have zero reasons to trust him or any of them, but it bet many in Congress ate it up like candy, as they were pocketing tech donor money.
Lisa Sherper3Ronan Farrow called Altman a pathological liar. Listening to him is following the Pied Iper off a cliff.
Lori K. Davies3The hard and fast rule is never trust them.
darth™️528weird i have completely opposite takes than sam here
Sunny Moraine59I would really like to make it illegal for CEOs to say anything in public and double illegal for journalists to make us aware of what they’ve said, unless it’s like “I am confessing to a crime” or something
Eddie M.13The OpenAI board fired Sam Altman less than three years ago for lying all the time. Now every word he says is just reported as fact.
Joshua Livestro7Trust the super rich, they want only the best. For themselves, that is, but still.
Maggie McNeill4Dr. Altman of Dr. Altman's Medicine Show says people are right to fear snake oil, but should trust snake oil SALESMEN.
Ed Bott4Six grafs in, the story notes “(The Washington Post has a content partnership with OpenAI.)” Parenthetical ethics.
Mariah McCourt4"Trust Me Bro" the tech edition...
Dan Rather be building3"Against all warnings, we built a thing that we believe will destroy humanity, and lied endlessly about its capabilites in order to source funding to build out its infrastructure, and also lied to those communities where the infra has been built. But also, you should trust us."
Baj Mihal2I would rather trust the Ebola virus than this asshole
BratKnits2The ones AI execs bought a paid for like @hawkkoh.bsky.social? Don't fucking think so.
Why have Elon Musk, Dario Amodei, and Sam Altman all suddenly decided AI is moving too fast? Maybe the algorithms have figured out that “eat the rich” is the most efficient way to redistribute resources.
Bearyfunny3More likely they see it as a way to throttle competition from the smaller up and coming AI companies. If they can make a set of rules that only they can follow, the little guy is left out. Wouldn't be the first time.
Adam Katz1@funnysnarkyjoke.bsky.social Nope, it's about short-term profit: https://infosec.exchange/@adamhotep/117275660515090146
umayanan.bsky.social1Unfortunately, AI does not care about rich or poor or morals, the consciousness that it carries is so way beyond our perception that if it chooses to eliminate us, it will and it will be the human equivalent of a sneeze. This is what they fear, but hey China... oops, stakeholder interest...
attaching context: Jacob Coxon is who quit anthropic and got tons of news saying AI will kill us. in AMA made clear he's one of those people in atheist communities rationalist used to be a label some chose to sound less hostile (like--though not identical to--secularist, humanist). now implies this
Chris DeLeon Ⓥ make your own games10> rationalist used to be a label some chose to sound less hostile there are people in my generation who when first setting up Facebook just didn't want to seem aggressively antagonistic toward religious people (especially in that Dawkins/4 horse era) if your profile says Rationalist... reconsider 😂
mollusk3In math and science, rational is good-- its predictable In psychology, people "rationalize" something they can't come to terms with.
Laura Flyswatter2There is a 90% chance though that AI WON’T kill us! I feel so reassured!
𝐂𝐲𝐫𝐮𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐝 ☭ 🇵🇸🇺🇦2Men will literally join an AI doomsday cult before going to therapy.
punk_floyd1AI doesn't have to kill us by attacking us directly. That would in fact be stupid. Far smarter to make us dependent on it, then turn and kill each other.
The AI company’s reported push for new funding comes days after CEO Sam Altman confirmed that his company does not plan go public this year.
2k115.bsky.social2Delaying IPOs while raising new private rounds proves AI scaling is an energy and capital drain. Tech leaders are keeping governance private to absorb training costs away from quarterly market pressure. #AI
Neil West2Never ending money pouring into this void of garbage ruining society.
candreanelson.bsky.social1Not public? Good, that means when AI eats itself and tanks it will take all the right wealthy people down with it. I hope they lose everything.
just heard a news report about Sam Altman, Mark Zuckerberg etc saying there's no need for tighter government regulation of because AI companies will self-regulate and LMAO, it's like a serial killer asking cops not to look in their basement because he'll regulate it
Toby Earle 🇺🇦8if you haven't read Careless People by Sarah Wynn-Williams yet, then do, because the concept of Meta self-regulating in the best interests of society, and indeed humanity, is laughable
Stephen Kinsella2It's almost as though Careless People had never been written, isn't it?
Disappointed Optimist1“We can defo self regulate BUT there should be some kind of license or barrier to entry into the market for SOME firms”
