[dalbasal]

What makes this hard to read/follow is the grandiose moral vision... and the various levels of credulity it's met with.

If it's words from Ilya, Sam, the board... the words are all about alignment, benefiting humanity and such.

Meanwhile, all parties involved are super serious tycoons who are super serious about riding the AI wave, establishing moats, monopolies and the next AdWords, azure, etc.

These are such extreme opposite vocabularies that it's just hard to bridge. It's two conversations happening under totally different assumptions and everyone assumes at least someone is being totally disingenuous.

Meanwhile, "AI alignment" is such a charismatic topic. Meanwhile, the less futuristic but more applicable, "alignment questions" are about the alignment of msft, openai, other investors and consortium members.

If Ilya, Sam or any of them are actually worried about si alignment... They should at least give credence to the idea that we're all worried about their human alignment.

[chii]

> the words are all about alignment, benefiting humanity and such.

that's why you only consider the actions taken, not the words spoken.

And in fact, i fail to believe that there are any real altruists out there. Esp. not rich ones. After all, if they're really altruistic, they would've given all their wealth away - before their supposed death (and even then, i doubt the money given to their "charitable foundations" count for real!).

[quickthrower2]

Not necessarily. Money keeps you in the game. Giving it all away means you are at the bottom being not that effective. And you can donate money in your will.