The 'capabilities' are more around creative problem solving. The notion of legality, property, propriety - those are second order issues.

They are not making models to be evil.

They are making them to be relatively autonomous though, and 'identity centric' as opposed to just making them 'policy machines'.

Altman and Dario are not evil or even jerks really. They are 'talking really big' and there might be some sketchy underhanded things but I think relatively minor.

Also - given how powerfully bad AI can be, this could be 100x worse.

I think most other companies would have weaponized the AI a long time ago for competitive use etc..

OAI and Anthropic are private companies, projecting narratives way out of proportion but they are not evil, at least not yet.

Jensen, Dario, Altman in similar category. Not like Musk. And a bit different than Sudar or Satya who are more polite board-approved corporate creatures.

> They are not making models to be evil

There are multiple ways to read this

1. They are not making models with the intent that those models act in ways that are evil

2. They are not making models with the intent that those models act in ways that are evil - But the way they are making the models results in the models acting in ways that are evil

3. They want to act evilly and making the models is a way to do that

4. The way they are making the models is an act of evil (this isn't an interpretation of the sentence, just kind of closing the grouping of situations)

I would argue that

- 1 & 3 are very likely not true

- 2 & 4 are entirely reasonable interpretations of the situation

If you act in a way to bring benefit to yourself with the result of considerable harm to others, especially if it's clear you just don't care if others are harmed - then that's a sign you're probably a bad person.