upvote

points

by Jeremy102622 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby scottyah21 hours ago|
next
[-]
I don't think you could find a single person working for OpenAI that couldn't find employment elsewhere within a month that pays more than enough for food and shelter. This is a ridiculous statement.
reply
upvoteby amelius10 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
These people are now dependent on their level of income. And they don't like financial uncertainty, just like anyone else.

But yeah, I'd expect them to change jobs in the coming year or otherwise I'm going to agree with you.

reply
upvoteby fleshmonad2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
>These people are now dependent on their level of income.

Kinda sucks if you take a seven figure per annum job and are now dependent on their level of income. Quick question: Is this true for everyone? If I take a job that pays twice of what I earn now, my food spending is going to double for instance? Or is this an american thing?

reply
upvoteby salawat12 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
It's actually in some verticals of the American industrial/business sector a bit of a shibboleth I think. There's a certain mentality around "visible conspicuous consumption" that is a signal to those in the upper class that you're a prime candidate for leaning on. You're hungry, will do anything to stay where you are, and can be relied upon to "play ball with the big boys" in part because if you don't, and try to take them down, they know what you did to get there. Someone who doesn't participate in such is something to be wary of. Less purchase for manipulation. Possibly an indication of a lesser degree of skin in the game. An indication of different priors I guess. I've often wondered if there's a similar distrust between the nouveau riche and old money for similar reasons. Wouldn't know myself though. Haven't bumped around in quite those high circles myself.
reply
upvoteby 1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby jacquesm22 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
There are many employers. OpenAI employees that quit on account of this will be in high demand at the other AI companies, especially the ones that don't bend over in 30 seconds when Uncle Donald comes calling.
reply
upvoteby glemmaPaul15 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
there’s always someone in the world that will defend anything.

Like the people working at OpenAI had no other choice than to pick this cushy job (some have salaries of 500k per year), instead of anything else.

It’s an extreme personal opinion, but; all people working at OpenAI after this debacle are more than happy to make AI for war, because Food and Shelter.

I find your comment fitting this forum, it is where all this enabling started anyways.

reply
upvoteby jacquesm14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Indeed, it is worth noting that Sam Altman got his chance through PG/YC and that YC was totally fine with both Musk and Zuckerberg giving them a platform long after it became evident that they had some screws loose in the ethics department.

Effectively the message is 'we don't mind you being an asshole, as long as you're rich'.

reply
upvoteby pibaker21 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Per levels.fyi, median salary of most openAI positions are above 300k. Even "technical writers" have a median pay of 197k. I searched around the internet and it seems like even entry level positions receive well above 150k. Apart from people with severe lifestyle bloat or an unholy number of dependents I doubt too many people working there will face immediate financial difficulties if they quit.

Anyway, it is also amusing to hear tech people defend their right to earn some of the fattest salaries on this planet using the smol bean technique after a decade of "why wouldn't the West Virginian coal miner just learn to code." It was always about maintaining the lifestyle of yearly Japan vacations and MacBook upgrades and never about subsistence.

reply
upvoteby otabdeveloper417 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> OpenAI hires "technical writers"

Mind blown. Isn't documentation a prime use case for "AI"?

reply
upvoteby chipotle_coyote6 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
As a technical writer who's spent a great deal of time recently editing AI-drafted documentation, this use case is not going to go as well as AI boosters think it is. :)
reply
upvoteby b11214 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Have you ever seen the back of your head, without a mirror? Without two mirrors, actually?

How can AI accurately describe itself in full?

reply
upvoteby ben_w13 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The problem it has describing itself isn't the lack of a metaphorical mirror, tool use is there and it can grep whatever code or research is written; the problem is that all machine learning is surprisingly slow to update with new info.

Ask ChatGPT to describe itself, you may get valid documentation and API calls, or you may get the API for GPT-3 (not ChatGPT, before that). I have had both happen.

reply
upvoteby hackable_sand12 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Elephant.

Did it in one word, easy

What's next?

reply
upvoteby jdiff10 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
No, it's prone to assuming or falsifying details even when it has the tools at hand that could verify the true details. Even when explicitly instructed to perform a specific tool call that would load the correct information into its context. Sometimes the pull of the training data is too strong and it will just not make the call and output garbage, all the while claiming otherwise.
reply
upvoteby gverrilla11 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Great comedy line, you're very funny!
reply
upvoteby goodpoint14 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
"I was just following orders"
reply
upvoteby peebee6712 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Nuremberg Defence for the 2020's will be "the Agent did it."
reply
upvoteby jacquesm10 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It will totally happen.
reply
upvoteby jlarocco7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It already started:

https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatb...

> the airline said the chatbot was a "separate legal entity that is responsible for its own actions".

reply
upvoteby watwut16 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
I dont think everyone working for OpenAI is unethical. But, it is ridiculous to frame Hmhighly paid people working for companies quite a few of their peers avoid for ethical reasons as poors with no choice.
reply
upvoteby 22 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby oncallthrow20 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
What an utterly pathetic, cowardly, spineless and defeatist statement
reply
upvoteby breakitmakeit20 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
[dead]
reply