Interesting speech
3 Likes
3 posts were merged into an existing topic: Post 18 — An Invitation to what comes next
It’s been a wild ride and I am really lucky to have been following it all.
Launch will leave an empty hole, but hopefully soon filled up with other
projects being built on top.
I’d like to see a Netflix Safe special, something like the billion dollar code,
but it may be too early for that yet.
I treasure the early swag we all got and still use that hoodie.
Will there be launch swag? I’d probably buy a branded leather jacket.
8 Likes
As long as we can pay in SNT 
6 Likes
only if they do an XXL in tan with active noise-cancelling and a fur collar.
2 Likes
To be clear I don’t see Elon as a good guy or hero here…
In a striking development, Elon Musk has taken legal action against OpenAI, accusing the company of prioritizing profit over humanity. This lawsuit sheds light on the intricate and long-standing relationship between Musk and Sam Altman, OpenAI’s CEO, particularly focusing on their divergent views on the development and deployment of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).
Main Points/Arguments
- The Lawsuit Overview: Musk’s lawsuit, filed in San Francisco, alleges that OpenAI, under Sam Altman’s leadership, has deviated from its foundational mission by entering into a profit-driven deal with Microsoft. The contention is that OpenAI is now focusing on developing AGI for commercial benefits rather than for the betterment of humanity.
- Historical Context and Musk’s Concerns: The document outlines the historical context of Musk’s and Altman’s collaboration on OpenAI, emphasizing their initial agreement to develop AGI as a non-profit venture for the public good. The lawsuit argues that this agreement has been breached, posing an existential threat to humanity due to the potential misuse of AGI.
- AGI and Its Implications: The lawsuit brings to light Musk’s views on the existential risks posed by AGI, comparing the intelligence disparity between humans and AGI to that between humans and chimps, and discussing the potential for AGI to render human intelligence and economic value obsolete.
- OpenAI’s Shift from Open to Closed Source: Highlighting a significant shift in OpenAI’s operational philosophy, the lawsuit criticizes the organization for moving away from its original open-source ethos towards a more secretive, proprietary stance, particularly with the development and handling of GPT-4.
- Allegations of AGI Achievement and Secrecy: The lawsuit alleges that OpenAI has made significant progress towards achieving AGI, particularly pointing to the development of a model known as “QAR” that may represent a breakthrough in AGI. However, it criticizes the organization for maintaining secrecy around its advancements, contrary to its founding principles.
Conclusion
The lawsuit filed by Elon Musk against OpenAI marks a critical juncture in the debate over the future of AI development and its governance. It raises profound questions about the balance between innovation, profit, and ethical responsibility in the era of advanced artificial intelligence. As the legal proceedings unfold, the case is set to offer insights into the challenges and dilemmas faced by pioneers at the forefront of AI research.
7 Likes
~33m, on “technofeudalism”, he’s written a book about it recently. Excellent interview, and very relevant to Safe. The idea is that we’re undergoing a change as large as from feudalism to capitalism, and we need to name it what it is. Capitalism is being eaten by itself, and a new thing has emerged, where things like “markets” and “profit” have new meanings.
At 17:16, Yanis is asked what he thinks the solution to technofeudalism is, and says “…Cloud capital must be socialised. In other words, it must belong to the people who actually produce it”.
I was immediately struck by the fact that the Safe Network remains the most far-sighted attempt at freeing us from the enclosures that we’ve been cajoled into accepting around us.
2 Likes
Introduction
This video delves into the intriguing notion of how a Mandela Effect can manifest in real-time through media and technology. The discussion is anchored around Quentin Tarantino’s film, “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,” and its revisionist portrayal of historical events, suggesting that media can significantly alter public perception of reality.
Main Points/Arguments
- Media’s Influence on Historical Perception: The film serves as a case study of how media can reshape historical events, potentially leading to misconceptions about actual events.
- Technological Manipulation of Reality: The video highlights a specific instance during the Super Bowl halftime show where Alicia Keys’ performance was digitally altered to correct a mistake. This edit was not disclosed, leading to a discrepancy between the live experience and the official record.
- The Slippery Slope of Digital Alterations: The discussion raises concerns about the broader implications of such technological capabilities. If minor performance errors can be corrected without acknowledgment, what stops more significant alterations of reality from being accepted as truth?
- The Emergence of AI and Its Impact: The video also touches on the role of artificial intelligence, like OpenAI’s Sora, in generating realistic video content. This technology’s existence further complicates the distinction between reality and fabrication.
- Societal Trust and the Digital Age: A significant portion of the discussion is devoted to how these technologies challenge societal trust. The ability to alter reality digitally could lead to a future where historical accuracy is questioned, and collective memory is unreliable.
Examples or Evidence
- A direct comparison between the NFL’s official video of Alicia Keys’ performance and the live broadcast highlights how subtle digital edits can create a divergent historical record.
- The mention of OpenAI’s Sora illustrates the advancing capabilities of AI in creating realistic, yet entirely fabricated, video content.
Additional Insights or Context
The video emphasizes the historical use of media and drama to influence public perception, drawing parallels to modern technologies that possess far greater potential for manipulation.
Conclusion
The video concludes with a reflection on the ethical implications of digital reality manipulation. It questions the long-term effects on societal trust and historical accuracy, urging viewers to critically assess the media they consume and the potential for a future where the Mandela Effect is a common occurrence due to digital alterations.
3 min.
Elon Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI, highlighting the shift from the company’s original mission as a non-profit organization dedicated to making AI freely available for the betterment of humanity. It emphasizes the partnership with Microsoft, which Musk and his lawyers argue contradicts the founding principles of OpenAI.
Main Points/Arguments
- OpenAI’s Shift from Non-Profit to Profit-Oriented Structure: Initially founded by Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and others in 2015 as a non-profit, OpenAI’s mission was to benefit humanity. However, a restructuring in 2019 led to the formation of a capped profit company, significantly influenced by a massive investment from Microsoft.
- Elon Musk’s Lawsuit: Musk’s lawsuit claims that OpenAI has transformed into a closed-source subsidiary of Microsoft, focusing on maximizing profits rather than benefiting humanity. This, according to Musk, is a betrayal of the original agreement.
- Financial and Structural Concerns: The video outlines the complex corporate structure that separates OpenAI’s non-profit origins from its current profit-driven motives. OpenAI is described as the world’s most valuable AI startup with a valuation of $86 billion.
- Elon Musk’s Role and Actions: Despite leaving the board in 2018 and refusing a stake in the for-profit arm, Musk has contributed over $44 million to OpenAI. His lawsuit seeks to address the deviation from OpenAI’s initial mission and ethos.
- Implications of Microsoft’s Influence: The lawsuit also highlights Microsoft’s significant influence over OpenAI, suggesting that Microsoft possesses overwhelming control and rights, potentially undermining the autonomy and original mission of OpenAI.
Examples or Evidence
- The lawsuit’s references to artificial general intelligence (AGI): It mentions models like GPT-4 and a developing model known as “QAR,” emphasizing the importance of these advancements in the context of OpenAI’s mission and the lawsuit.
Additional Insights or Context
The video provides a background on the importance of keeping AI developments open and accessible, contrasting with the current trajectory of OpenAI under the influence of Microsoft. It also reflects on Musk’s history of legal challenges and his consistent stance on open-source principles.
Conclusion
The lawsuit filed by Elon Musk against OpenAI serves as a critical examination of the ethical and operational shifts within one of the most influential organizations in the AI industry. It raises significant questions about the balance between profit and public good in the realm of technological advancements, especially in AI. The outcome of this legal battle could have far-reaching implications for the future of AI development and accessibility.
1 Like
Hollywood is doomed. It’s only a matter of time until we are generating our own entertainment at home with AI.
2 Likes
How do you summarize videos like this?
AlphaNotes GPT on GPT4. They let you do 3 for free a week above that you’d have to pay. Looking forward to my SN AI assistant 
3 Likes
More eloquently stated than I.
Response to Tucker on Lex
Because Maidsafe was mentioned as a competitor.
2 Likes
A lot more funding is being poured into quantum computing and things are heating up and moving faster.
It’s been explained before, but I can’t find any clear answers in Safe Network documents regarding the quantum proofing of bits like SNT. IMO, the data is likely secure enough with self-encryption as that makes it much harder. But if there are other attack vectors that quantum opens up then I’m hoping we (Safe community) will have that covered.
Also would be great PR for us to be able to claim at launch that we are quantum resistant or even quantum proof.
1 Like
We’ve been told in the past that the encryption is quantum resistant.
Quantum computers cannot though monitor the internet anything like multiple computers at each of the major link interfaces and boarder routers. That requires locality to the monitor points and connections. Quantum computers basically do one task and does it real fast. Like decrypt older encryption fast but unless they can position them in place of all those monitoring PCs then its limited to breaking older encryption for data given to it. And the NSA documents show that they can only capture high profile traffic and then only 10% of it (at the boarder routers). Now they hope they can decrypt it sometime and thus even that slice of traffic is valuable to them.
1 Like
He actually says it isnt a competitor:
2 Likes
That’s because there is no competition. 
4 Likes
thats too true
2 Likes
2 posts were merged into an existing topic: Discussion of Covid-19 information (No holds barred)