new | show | ask | jobs Github

zug_zug 2 hours ago

Seems like a character attack that has no bearing on the question of whether external safety intervention is necessary

▲

kjgkjhfkjf 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Given the sums of money involved, it's hard for me to take these highly publicized heroic resignations at face value.

▲

estearum an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Don't work at a lab: dismissible for not knowing anything

Do work at a lab: dismissible for being conflicted

Used to work at a lab: dismissible for having ulterior motives

I'm feeling safer already!

▲

0xDEAFBEAD 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Shouldn't it be just the opposite? He could make a large sum of money if he continues to work at OpenAI?

Recall that when Daniel Kokotajlo resigned, he believed he was giving up his equity under the terms of the agreement he had signed. That’s what it was worth to him to avoid signing a non-disparagement agreement. Does that count for anything?

▲

donbox an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Why did he not loose the equity eventually.

	▲	0xDEAFBEAD an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		There was an uproar and OpenAI ended up essentially giving it back to him.
	▲	darkmarmot 42 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		lose

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

taurath 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe more an indication of the amount of trust openAI and AI researchers generally have (not) earned. When one (through a hired PR agency and Time magazine article) parrots the position pushed by Sam who has been so untrustworthy the board tried to remove him, it’s worth not taking things at face value and applying a critical lens.