Accept 'bad things' in return for benefits of AI, says Sam Altman

Surprised that people are still quoting a decade old rumor.

  …without losing control of the company if his absence is “in connection with his serving in a government position or office.” I assume the two years would cover the period Mark would be taking on the—presumably time-consuming—endeavor of campaigning to be president of the United States.

Especially in a world that's been programmed to believe wholeheartedly that money is literally the most important thing in the entire universe, and these people who worship it as a god will never be satisfied with any amount of money; even when the last human alive owns all of it, they'll still want more. It's a form of mass-insanity. The Cult of Money.

Trump could fairly easily make any of the tech CEO’s life living hell with endless investigations and court battles and possible incarceration. So I would say power is power. That is the one thing Thiel and his ilk are afraid of.

Which, as I have said:

-- is a field that has been developed for many decades - automated processing is classical AI. Why should it be now attributed to Sam Altman, whose company mainly does LLMs. If Sam Altman shouts "little risks much reaps", I would not think as surveillance as the first relevant rebuttal.

-- if the peoples do not want surveillance (what awakened them, a large number of places that were supposed to be civilized are cashless societies now), that would be a political matter, from which consequential legislation should be the goal.

This is a new type of technology, there is no real sense of its limits or capabilities. Regulating it appropriately or even just understanding best practices for using it is still way out by many years.

And also every country is working on it so it will get built and used for economic and military purposes, by someone.

This is just the nature of it. And yes there’s nothing at all that stops the US from doing something self destructive in terms of over regulation. I suspect this will happen eventually but Chinese models are really good.

When they speak of "existential consequences", it is not as members of humanity. It is a projection of their control over humanity. Personal risk for them is just being made into a regular human (no longer being ultrawealthy). They can't even contemplate physical risk. Case in point, this exact same class of people are buying up private islands and literally purchasing the blood of poorer people.

They would never accept your wager. It's the kind of thing Elon Musk would say "sounds interesting" to on Joe Rogan ten years ago, and then the only consequence after that would be his fanboys reminding everyone how cool it was that he said that.

Systemic failure triggers the parasystemic shortcuts. Lack of justice and fairness has grave consequences - they must be curbed with justice and fairness (and their roots) exactly.

--

Any formal objection to the general principle above, current-snipers? Some states are already failed states, where justice is simply not there. At that point, the "at least it is not anarchy" that I myself have heard does not sound right. The reply below from hagbard_c is not sufficient: it is not a matter of slow justice but of clogged justice, and AI is not really relevant here.

Ideally, yes, but what is to be done when we're in the situation where people get to actively harm others, but are immune from consequences just because they're wealthy, powerful, and/or executives of corporations?

I suppose monitoring is a good in the eyes of those who influence society.

Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Elon Musk, David Sacks, etc. All the rest of you proles can fuck off. Stay in your lane.

We know we are in trouble.