His Wikipedia article is quite a ride. Apparently he and a Stephen Chamberlain were recently found innocent for a bunch of fraud charges. They boil down to inflating the value of a SW company he sold to Hewlett-Packart. They died within a day of each other in unrelated accidents. Must be rough.
Dear god, my ribs are hurting after 2 paragraphs already.
Paywall just slammed shut. archive link
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
The countersuit went so far as to ask the court to force Altman to “change its deceptive and misleading name to ClosedAI or a different more appropriate name.”
top kek
The guy (pun not intended) seems honestly as decent as you might hope for in a serial entrepreneur. Maybe a bit naive for expecting better from the players involved, but to me he comes off as endearingly earnest.
I just woke up and some nerd is staring into my soul, asking why I was rude to the spicy autocomplete. What is this? Go home world, you’re drunk.
Doesn’t even mention the one use case I have a moderate amount of respect for, automatically generating image descriptions for blind people.
And even those should always be labeled, since AI is categorically inferior to intentional communication.
They seem focused on the use case “I don’t have the ability to communicate with intention, but I want to pretend I do.”
It’s a thing unfortunately. Here’s an event by the minister of justice this month: https://crm.fdpbt.de/termin/4-blockchain-roundtable-code-law-wie-sich-unser-recht-smart-contracts-und-legal-tech
As a german, kind of a relief that the mouthpiece of Bitcoin in parliament is some used-to-be-AfD nobody. (AfD = far right, pretty politically isolated). This shit could have come from the FDP (pro-business liberals) just as well, and they control the ministry of finance!
I expect some crypto sympathizers in the FDP, but if weirdos like this are the loudest advocates they will probably want to avoid the association.
I’ll add that such statistics are very much a moving target, since AVs are still “getting better every day”. The software is (and will be) under constant development, and there will likely be tradeoffs between safety for pedestrians and convenience for passagers (e.g. how sensitive is the trigger for an emergency break?)
Looking at it as an ongoing relationship between AV operators, regulators and people makes a lot of sense to me. I agree with the points of the video, that operators will likely push for a “just safe enough” standard and try to offload responsibilities onto bystanders.