I care in that we are at one of the historic inflection points in tech history - so I waant a very salient truth as to what decisions (and by whom) are steering what is going to be the next era in the information age. I love it.
So, what I care about is a true lens into how we will be getting to the next step in the path.
Thats all I care about...
And obviously SA is a master at ensuring the engineers in his harem are well fed (paid).
But its really important to note who his closest bodies are in his orbit. There is no question about Thiels propensity for imbuing his views in his interests - and, personally, I'd really like to know what SA's goals and views and desires are especially WRT how they are colored by those he trusts, or advises him, such as Thiel.
Its critically important to see the path ahead - because there is no going back from the level of entanglement AI is causing, and will cause. I love how Tristan said it regarding AI, and where it is today
>"It the worst it will ever be" (meaning its only going to get stronger and more entangled, and thus, this is the only optimal time to check our rudder)
And SA and Thiel have a solid grasp on the inputs to that rudder.
I hope that all the youngin's in tech (like the actual teenagers, like my children) are really paying attention to where we are in tech history with AI in general - and with OpenAI in particular - as SA can attempt to look like a Carnegie but actually be a Rockefeller.
I do a lot of local politics work now, which means I pay attention to a lot of arguments that are isomorphic to these HN kinds of arguments, but that are about zoning or the kind of materials we're using to pave roads or whatever. This thread resembles to me nothing so much as the vibe in a debate about whether a neighboring municipality should be allowed to build a McDonalds right on our border. Strong opinions all around, lots of projected consequences, but in the end we don't have a say, there's nothing we can do about it directly.
Of course you have a say. Many policies are made above the municipal level, and California is a good example of a place where people eventually got tired of not having a say in zoning decisions of neighboring municipalities and did something about it.
And beyond a direct say any person of course can be an advocate for anything. And should be, if it affects their society.
Not sure you meant to make the exact opposite point of the one you stated, but convincing people they don't have a say, when in fact they do, is a pretty longstanding trick of the ruling class, so perhaps you've been convinced as well.
I came up with a term for the type of argument OP is making 'Astro-Gasing'
Astro-turfing/Gaslighting at the same time:
"The act of one or many to feign as though they dont care, and there is nothing to worry about, or what one can do - so just go along with it, when eventually the truth is revealed that there was in fact something to worry about - the astro-gassers stood to benefit from your complacency." Whether Thomas realizes it or not - he is in this class.
Further, there is an entire new city being bought-up, planned and developed in the greater Bay Area as a new tech-city. I 100% gaurantee you, it will be riddled with AI 'living augmentations'... its being built by the technorati in SV. It will be interesting to see how that builds out.
> I hope that all the youngin's in tech (like the actual teenagers, like my children) are really paying attention to where we are in tech history with AI in general - and with OpenAI in particular - as SA can attempt to look like a Carnegie but actually be a Rockefeller.
You should hope that they go back to school and study history. All of this has happened before, many times over.
>All of this has happened before, many times over.
Sounds good on paper, but the nature of modern day life is far different than it was when other revolutions occurred.
Yes, revolutions in tech are just that - they up-end the old way of life, the dust settles and a new way of living emerges.
This is so basically obvious that its not worth mentioning.
What is worth more than mentioning, but truly paying attention to, aside from Thomas' analogy to a neighboring mcdonalds, which is an actually insanely lazy look at this matter - especially coming from one who is a security expert, is that the level of "entanglement" into our daily life with massive core-AI systems, such as the capabilities of GPT-'N' has, cannot be understated.
When cars overtook horses, we could weaponize cars by putting guns on them and calling them tanks. But once you put a gun on a car and call it a tank, it can only shoot at one target at a time.
With AI, when it provides the substrate upon which you will interface with the information relationship you have the rest of global reality, can be easily weaponized, not just against you, but anyone and anything interfacing with it, its important to know who, or at least what incentives, truly owns, or at least is the lens through which one interfaces with whatever information that system provides.
SO, aside from 'doom-and-gloom' -- its really important to really understand as much as possible, and rather than Thomas' just throwing up his hands (which again is bizarre from a security guy just saying he doesnt care who runs the black box, is weird) - I want to know how whatever that system is (openAI/whatever dominant AI) and who made it such and what agency I still retain in my digital life.
--
@Unity:
Entanglement of big business and government in our lives was and will always be - what big-core-AI provides both business and governments (which now there is vanishingly thin membranes between the two these days) complete solvent for any friction for said entanglement.
AI's capabilities for extracting indivulaized-insights-AT-SCALE is what AI provides to both, with zero recourse from the individuals. That is the "alignment" problem that Aza and Tristan are pushing back against.
Also- I do not "worship" or "idolize" SA, and especially Thiel - I am terrified of them. That's why I said that they may attempt to appear as a Carnegie, but are actually a Rockefeller (Carnegie attempted to wash his reputation with endowments - Rockefeller was just an evil oil-carpet-bagging C*Sucker and an evil person (he is the reason we have "fossil fuels" as manufactured scarcity for profit)
I have no idea why you think I idolize any of this - I am fully, and even further, into the Raskin-Harris camp... alignment regulation is going to get trampled - and to be honest, I have serious questions about SAs motives...
I'd bet he's already got a team working on the plans for his bunker/lair, and taking notes from the Zucks and Thiels on best design resources.
> the level of "entanglement" into our daily life with massive core-AI systems, such as the capabilities of GPT-'N' has, cannot be understated.
Entanglement of big business and government is not new. Yes, we should be very concerned, but the solution is not to worship idols like business leaders or politicians. They will not solve that problem for us. You have to think carefully before handing more authority to individuals who've already been ascribed far more than is due.
> from a security guy just saying he doesnt care who runs the black box, is weird
One cannot select the "right" person to run that black box. We're all biased, flawed, etc. So yes, you should be concerned. But use that concern to drive your actions towards distributing authority– not centralizing it through more idol worship.
In response to your edit:
> I do not "worship" or "idolize" SA, and especially Thiel - I am terrified of them.
This is idol worship. You're ascribing a power to Altman and Thiel that they do not have. Bad behavior has consequences that are beyond what even the government can impose. If Altman or Thiel were to make a habit of targeting people, he or his adherents/descendants would eventually find themselves friendless in a house built on sand. Altman almost lost his job that way. The fact that consequences may play out slowly in some cases doesn't make it less true. Nobody can infinitely violate the golden rule without eventually facing consequences.
So, what I care about is a true lens into how we will be getting to the next step in the path.
Thats all I care about...
And obviously SA is a master at ensuring the engineers in his harem are well fed (paid).
But its really important to note who his closest bodies are in his orbit. There is no question about Thiels propensity for imbuing his views in his interests - and, personally, I'd really like to know what SA's goals and views and desires are especially WRT how they are colored by those he trusts, or advises him, such as Thiel.
Its critically important to see the path ahead - because there is no going back from the level of entanglement AI is causing, and will cause. I love how Tristan said it regarding AI, and where it is today
>"It the worst it will ever be" (meaning its only going to get stronger and more entangled, and thus, this is the only optimal time to check our rudder)
And SA and Thiel have a solid grasp on the inputs to that rudder.
I hope that all the youngin's in tech (like the actual teenagers, like my children) are really paying attention to where we are in tech history with AI in general - and with OpenAI in particular - as SA can attempt to look like a Carnegie but actually be a Rockefeller.