Regulations are rules that you force on a market, but the actors in the market should not be assumed to be all operating against the regulations before they come into play. Said in other words, these companies don't need to wait for regulation to not destroy the world, if that's truly what they think will happen.
> inb4 someone else will do it
They believe that if they don't destroy the world someone else will so better be them
I really don't understand what's happening here lately such that 15-year-old accounts are behaving so poorly. This is the first time you've said 'inb4' in what I can only guess is thousands of comments over a decade and a half. If you don't care about the standards here anymore, why stick around and make things worse for the rest of us? Is there some other draw than quality of conversation?
I wrote something earlier to the same effect and wound up deleting it because it let too much frustration through. I am frustrated, but you don't deserve the brunt of that. Sorry if that's still coming through.
Now you really have an example of breaking the rules.
They can stop doing a thing they claim should be regulated. You dont need to be regulated and forced to do the thing you consider right, especially when you are the primary one collecting the money to do the bad thing.
They could train ai for pro-social purposes, they dont here. They could make it useful for worker, they intentionally try to harm workers. And then pretend "it just happened".
> They can stop doing a thing they claim should be regulated.
That's not how the world works. there are tradeoffs and we need to learn how to navigate it. not just dismiss it straight up.
I don't know what OpenAI employees were thinking, but thankfully it looks like they're thinking again.