Normally, businesses spend a lot of money saying "no, our products are 100% safe" and get very upset with people who say they are not.
You are literally looking at someone who resigned because the company is acting unsafely, where other people from the same company are responding to this by saying "we agree, this is all very unsafe", in a community where all the various competitors have signed public statements saying "this is unsafe", where people who have Nobel prizes are saying "this is unsafe", where the philosophical centre of mass in the current research community circles around MIRI and LessWrong where the founders made the book "if anyone builds it, everyone dies" because they are so very tired of having to explain that they mean literally, where one of the major independent research organisations is "Model Evaluation and Threat Research", and where the major model makers have been sued for harm already caused by their systems and in one case have been ordered by the US government to prevent people accessing their model because they thought it was too dangerous.
A normal business would be shut down by almost any of these things independently, let alone all of them together. This remains true regardless of whether or not the leaders are psychopathic enough to think this is a good marketing campaign or not.
If this doesn't convince you there's a risk, what on earth would convincing you even look like?
Comments
Normally, businesses spend a lot of money saying "no, our products are 100% safe" and get very upset with people who say they are not.
You are literally looking at someone who resigned because the company is acting unsafely, where other people from the same company are responding to this by saying "we agree, this is all very unsafe", in a community where all the various competitors have signed public statements saying "this is unsafe", where people who have Nobel prizes are saying "this is unsafe", where the philosophical centre of mass in the current research community circles around MIRI and LessWrong where the founders made the book "if anyone builds it, everyone dies" because they are so very tired of having to explain that they mean literally, where one of the major independent research organisations is "Model Evaluation and Threat Research", and where the major model makers have been sued for harm already caused by their systems and in one case have been ordered by the US government to prevent people accessing their model because they thought it was too dangerous.
A normal business would be shut down by almost any of these things independently, let alone all of them together. This remains true regardless of whether or not the leaders are psychopathic enough to think this is a good marketing campaign or not.
If this doesn't convince you there's a risk, what on earth would convincing you even look like?