OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Says We Need to "Accept Some Bad Things" for AI - Demand to Victimize World

Eli the Computer Guy (0:00)

I think it's time we all come together and give Sam Altman what he really deserves. That's why I'm going to be starting a crowdfunding campaign so everybody can chip in a little money to be able to buy Sam Altman a pony. I think that is the least we can do for everything that Sam Altman is giving us, right? When one of the Brolligarchies wants to do nasty things to our bunghole, they shouldn't buy us the pony. We should be so appreciative of them raining down their degeneration on us that we should be buying them the pony. I mean, think about this with Sam Altman's sister. She should be proud that he made him the man that he is today. If things had worked out differently, who knows? Maybe Sam Altman would not be in this position if his sister hadn't been around so many years ago. Accusations. You can Google the accusations. All I'm saying is draw a line from point A to point B to point C to point D to point E, and ask yourself, does it look like a pretty damn straight line? So anyways, I think this is interesting. Coming from The Guardian and other sources at this point, Sam Altman did an interview and basically accept quote bad things in return for benefits of AI, says Sam Altman. Boss of OpenAI calls for a regulatory light touch because of the quote good stuff the technology can deliver. So because the technology can deliver good things, you should accept whatever felonies that Sam Altman wants to rain down upon your organization. And now to be clear, now to be clear, to some degree, I actually do agree with this, right? Every, with every technology, with every improvement, right? On the aggregate, things will get better. From an individual standpoint, things might get worse, right? If you have, let's say, you have 200 people in poverty, and you have 100 people that are in the middle class, right? What if you could put 200 people into the middle class, so there's only 100 people in poverty, right? That would be amazing. So on aggregate, things are better. Here's the issue. Some of the people that were in the middle class before, when things get shuffled around, whatever they're doing might not be so valuable. Whatever resources they have might not be so valuable anymore. And so they might get shunted into being poor, right? So on the whole, you now have 200 people that are in the middle class, where you had 100 people before. So that means on the aggregate, things are better. But for some individuals, things have gotten worse. And that's the reality, right? That is something that we do have to take into consideration whenever we're moving forward, to realize just because things are getting better, for the most part, doesn't mean things are going swimmingly for everybody, right? There are people that are going to be hurt. And so I do think, I do think honestly, that we do have to consider this when we're thinking about developing new technologies and going into the future. The problem with this though, is when we look at cultures, when we look at cultures, when we look at intent, right? So intent drives everything, right? Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face, right? As Mike Tyson used to say. But here's the thing, right? If you're intent, if you're intent is to go in a certain direction, then even after you get punched in the face, you will still continue to generally go in that direction, right? You're going to course correct, going, going that particular way. And so the problem that I have right now with OpenAI in their god awful culture, right? OpenAI full of the worst human beings on the planet, right? Just complete degenerates. The problem with these folks is not the fact that their technology might cause some harm, but, you know, you should accept that, but for the greater good, it will be better. The problem is, is that the amount of harm that they seem to be willing to commit against others and then shrug their shoulders, right? We've seen this with the hugging face thing, right? One of the most fascinating things about the hugging face thing came out from CNBC, talked about this, I think last week, is that it was 14,000 agents hammering the ever loving shit out of hugging face for days or possibly weeks. And so again, if you want to talk about harm, like a single AI, a single AI agent, right? With full use of a single, you know, NVIDIA high value GPU can be a pain in the ass, right? Just it can cause some issues. And so if you had one agent doing something stupid, hugging face, maybe you could sit there and say, look, sometimes there's problems in life. Sometimes things are going to go wrong. But look, OpenAI apparently had 14,000 agents. How much money was Sam Altman burning to beat the shit out of hugging face, right? At this point in time, we now have at least 100 organizations that OpenAI has communicated with to say that they have, that their AI agents have attacked or vandalized or caused some kind of damage. It looks like this number is going to continue to go up and up and up and up. So the important thing to understand with this, with OpenAI is this isn't a mistake. This isn't a problem. This isn't right. This is a culture. This is a culture of not giving a shit. How much harm they cause anybody else, as long as they get what they want. Right? You don't care what happens to his sister. As long as long as long as long as at the end of the day, he gets his equity money. Right? That is the most important thing coming out of OpenAI, right? So when you have this abject degeneracy coming from the top of OpenAI, going through their entire corporate culture, and then this garbage human being then comes out and says, well, look, we're going to have to hurt people to give you valuable things. Again, is that a bill that you want to pay? Here's the question, Sam Altman. Is the amount of harm your criminal enterprise committing so good for the rest of humanity that you're willing to rot in prison for the next two decades?