[ftxbro]

He's just acknowledging that is what Congress is worried about. He's not just going to say "no I don't think it's possible that it can do harm" when they ask him if AI can do harm. If he was the kind of guy who would say that, he wouldn't have won whatever machiavelli hunger game power struggle to be CEO of the company. What I'm saying is that he is using his powers of social and emotional intelligence, he's not necessarily being sincere when he says these things to Congress, and at some level they don't want him to be or expect him to be sincere in that way.

[sho_hn]

It's entirely possible you're right, but isn't that also very cynical? Does the guy have an established track record of being questionable or evasive, or are you arguing for healthy cynicism as a safety stance?

[ftxbro]

It's not cynical and at that level it's not called being questionable or evasive. It's called being professional. The kind of sincerity that you seem to be expecting would be called like a nerdy socially unaware engineer type behavior and in the face of some obliviously sincere answer the congressmen would be glancing around looking for the actual CEO or for who the real adult in the room is.

Also asking for a track record of someone in this role in this situation is like if you see a new commercial and you believe everything they tell you is literally true until you see that this specific company's marketing department has a track record for anything less than complete sincerity in its ads or commercials or marketing claims or whatever.

[mnky9800n]

He's a successful CEO of a large non profit but maybe for profit open source but not really open source ai lab that may be a company instead. So yes.