Between this article and others that I have read, it's difficult for me to not see the term 'AI Safety' as mere newspeak.

Why is this term so vague everywhere it is used?

I somehow missed this:

> “Building smarter-than-human machines is an inherently dangerous endeavour. OpenAI is shouldering an enormous responsibility on behalf of all of humanity,” Leike wrote.

Leike clearly did the right thing by resigning, GPT-4o is dangerous and irresponsible. But if that tweet is how OpenAI employees actually think of themselves and their technology...... yeesh.

I don’t know if others have noticed, but GPT-4o doesn’t have the preachiness and moral smugness that earlier GPT models had.

The earlier ChatGPT models were very quick to call a request unsafe or unethical and refuse to help.

GPT-4o is a breath of fresh air compared to that. If this improvement was a result of people like Leike resigning - then good riddance.

ChatGPT has a several paragraph long hardcoded system prompt teaching it all about how to be mindful of DEI. And chatGPT is not "smarter-than-human." This argument rings of "violent games make kids violent".

If that's the case, then OpenAI might very well be the new Netscape or Blackberry (RIM).

If capitalism driven climate change doesn't get us, capitalism driven AI is a good backup!