[iou]

Did anyone else miss the sleight of hand from OpenAI with all this? I thought their goal was safety in AI usage? https://openai.com/charter/

But then they just sold to Microsoft and the race began, how is that not a violation of their charter there?

[wmeredith]

Charters tend to go out the window once enough money is involved. Remember when Google's mission was don't be evil? They axed that pretty quickly once they got up and running.

[rst]

Compare and contrast that to this, from current OpenAI head Sam Altman, in which he literally promises AI systems that will tailor themselves to the user's political views -- which comes way too close for me to promising that they'll tell the users whatever they need to hear to keep them happy. https://twitter.com/sama/status/1627110892059099138

(text from Altman: "we don’t want ChatGPT to be pro or against any politics by default, but if you want either then it should be for you; working on this now")

[pixl97]

"If you pay us for digital Hitler, we'll give you digital Hitler" --AI companies, circa 2026

[rst]

Already available in 2023: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/chatgpt-gpt-chat-bot-...

[genman]

Remember Google's do no evil? Many people naively believed it for long time after it was obviously clear for a decade that they had abandoned it long time ago.

[29athrowaway]

It is just a non-legally binding pinky promise.

I advise you to not give much importance to it.

Money and power corrupt everything they touch.

[JohnFen]

> I thought their goal was safety in AI usage?

Nothing but hot air. I think the actions of OpenAI demonstrate this handily.