That is ridiculous. You cannot withhold something like an effective cure for cancer from broad adoption, and thinking you can is just conspiracy bullshit. Imagine an internal OpenAI model develops it tomorrow. Would everyone of the thousands of OpenAI scientists get in on the conspiracy to keep it secret, even though many of them probably know someone dying from cancer right now? Obviously not.

▲

achierius an hour ago | parent [-]

I'm sorry, do you understand how the medical industry works? It wouldn't be one cure, it's going to be dozens of treatments, each of which will be incredibly expensive.

Or else how do you explain Danyelza? Used to treat neuroblastoma, costs upwards of $1m per year. Do you have any proof that this will be different?

You're calling realistic people conspiracy theorists. Whose side are you on?

	▲	Marha01 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> I'm sorry, do you understand how the medical industry works? Yes, I actually work in the medical industry. There is no hiding the cure for cancer. > Or else how do you explain Danyelza? Used to treat neuroblastoma, costs upwards of $1m per year. Do you have any proof that this will be different? Oh, you are American. Let me tell you a secret: the problems of your healthcare insurance system are not a worldwide phenomenon, nor an immutable fact of this universe. Perhaps the cure for cancer, if expensive, will not be easily available to the poorest Americans, at least initially (the cost will come down sooner or later). But that is a very different claim from "they'd never give it to you".