[skeaker]

Yes, it is fair to assume that and in cases like these it will continue to be for the perceivable future. The AI does not stand to gain anything by about lying about a simple puzzle game, and neither does the CEO. Even if the CEO somehow did, it would be a disproportionately colossal amount of effort to tamper with ChatGPT in this specific instance. And that's also assuming that the CEO himself has all the knowledge and tools needed to do all of it himself, which I doubt.

[latexr]

You keep mentioning “cases like this” as a qualifier. This case isn’t relevant, it’s an inconsequential puzzle game. “This specific instance” is not the point.

There is no reason to assume “the CEO himself” would personally do it. History is full of bad CEOs making harmful decisions and they definitely don’t need to (and often wouldn’t even be able to) do it on their own. Sam (presumably) isn’t out there personally scamming more people for their retina scans, but someone is: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34981352