Sam Altman is now talking to the White House about decelerating AI
twitter.com
twitter.com
Ah, the spherical cow in vacuum at the event horizon is a scary sight indeed, everybody should be worried, the more the merrier.
Look at all that freedom!
Look at that mercantilism!
FTFY
…pls invest more money”
That's please in Epsteinglish
Elon Musk
Yeah, I mean, yes, pretty much. Let's, let's enjoy the ride. I think my philosophy at this point because I mean honestly there seems to be just an inexorable progress here in Al and, and in robots that even if I wanted to stop it, and I don't, I couldn't.
Zanny Minton Beddoes
Do you think there's still a 10 to 20% chance that killer robots mean the end of humanity?
That's a high P doom, as they say.
- https://elonmuskarchive.org/video/economist-elon-musk-2026-0...The only question is how much of a grey zone is there between these 2 points.
Philanthropy is always hard to place exactly. When you're a normal person, it's just how much money you can give to charity; when you're rich, you have to ask questions like "will my donation break something?" (Mansa Musa) or "is it better to spend all of my money at a shot to eliminate some problem forever, or put all the money in a charitable trust which pays out the dividends it earns each year forever, without ever fully fixing it but always at least helping?" (how is the Gates foundation doing with all the recent stuff about the guy himself?)
I think Richard Branson is generally considered to be a decent person?
(Richard Branson is "only" worth about $3B btw)
> (Richard Branson is "only" worth about $3B btw)
Yes? And?
> Yes? And?
And if that's how far down the list one needs to go to find a billionaire of good repute, that's not a good sign for billionaires.
If I look at e.g. this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World's_Billionaires_2015 (chosen because it's the most recent one on Wikipedia that's not summarised to a top 10), most of those people I've never heard of and know nothing about. I recognise perhaps a fifth of the names, know little about even most of the names I do recognise, and and that includes the ones (Musk, Bezos, Murdoch, Zuckerberg, the Koch brothers, and Ellison) who are infamously colossal dicks.
Richard Branson, in the UK, is mostly known for being a serial entrepreneur and using the word "Virgin" in all brands even where this is silly (Virgin Maternity Wards, Virgin Brides).
If Anthropic and OpenAI both genuinely want deceleration, then just make a joint agreement to pause releases and stop trying to front-run the race.
You can't simultaneously claim China is only somewhat keeping up by "distilling" your models, and not acknowledge that therefore it's your models, not China's, that is dangerously accelerating frontier capabilities.
US AI companies "help, we're destroying society - please stop us".
If OpenAI wanted to slow down their own research and/or releases they could do that without the government telling them to do that.
If Anthropic and OpenAI both genuinely want deceleration, then just make a joint agreement to pause releases and stop trying to front-run the race.
No, in point of fact, they can not do this. To do so would be a breach of fiduciary duty to their shareholders and investors, exposing them to severe personal liability and in some jurisdictions also jail time.2) Your argument is like saying that a car company that wants to push back the delivery date to make the car safe could be sued by investors for not rushing it out the door.
3) They can cancel acceleration and borrowing plans.
Is openAI not technically still a nonprofit? In any case, this argument doesn't make sense, it's like saying Boeing didn't have a choice wrt the 737 Max because had they waited, they would have been in breach of their fiduciary duty.
This is not true.
Unless the only thing he’s asking for is for his own company to be nationalized then at this point he’s saying one thing and meaning another.