[jstummbillig]

There are some vague ideas and fears here. Understandable. Trying find a silver lining from where to get somewhere: Where would GPT4 and onwards be better housed? Is there a setup -- an individual, a company, an institution, a concept, license -- where the whole thing would clearly better fit, than with OpenAI?

Note, I am not suggesting that they are particularly un/qualified or un/trustworthy. I am just trying to figure, if the problem is with the nature of the technology, that maybe there is not entity or setup, that would obviously be a good fit for governing gpt because gpt is simply scary, or this is a personality issue.

[startupsfail]

I think that a mix of public-private ownership is likely a good idea.

And there should be some serious oversight. The decisions at the level of proliferation of plutonium and building atomic bombs should not be done solely by a startup founder under a pressure to deliver, to keep the hype, to not let the team be headhunted, etc.

I also don’t know about your familiarity with Ycombinator, but they are successful partially because they are pretty brutal. They are not the peace-time CEOs. And I’m not sure, if you want the AGI to be developed in a ways of a war-time CEO. And this is exactly what is going on now.

I’d probably call for organizing a consortium of US-Government-Microsoft-Google-Intel-Nvidia-OpenAI to lead the decision making process and to relieve the pressure on OpenAI to some degree.