[Esophagus4]

On one hand, the media hammered OpenAI for not doing enough to protect people from the possible harms of AI.

Then OpenAI takes steps to mitigate those risks, and it becomes a salacious story as well.

Society having no idea what to expect from these tools makes this a difficult situation for LLM providers.

[ep103]

It wouldn't be a difficult situation if these guys were ethical shops from the get-go, but they aren't, they're trying to staple minimally required ethics on afterwards, and it shows.

[Ajedi32]

LLMs are not moral agents. Any attempt to make them behave that way will necessarily be "staple[ed] on afterwards".

[Esophagus4]

To play devil’s advocate, what ethical safeguards are OpenAI responsible for that they have failed to implement?

This is a wild and difficult to understand technology, even for the people building it. And their safeguards are constantly evolving.

I think you’re attributing to malice what should be attributed to people commercializing a novel technology that is, frankly, being exploited by users.

[pavel_lishin]

I'm not the person you're responding to, but I'm more than happy to attribute it to incompetence.

But I don't think that's quite the slam-dunk defense that they're looking for.

[Esophagus4]

I get that argument, but I also don’t think that’s quite fair.

If OpenAI, the market leader with the field’s top talent lured by eye watering pay packages, isn’t competent, then no one really is.

[oceanplexian]

> On one hand, the media hammered OpenAI for not doing enough

How about ignore the increasingly irrelevant mainstream media and do what you feel is right?

[Esophagus4]

Huh?

You watch too much TV - there are plenty of decent news sources that publish concerned pieces about OpenAI’s effects on society at large. And it is obviously having an effect on OpenAI as well.

[echelon_musk]

> ignore the increasingly irrelevant mainstream media

> You watch too much TV

Nice.