13 comments

  • fidotron 18 minutes ago

    > Before working at OpenAI, she was Meta’s chief ethicist

      cyanydeez 10 minutes ago

      So more of an ethicist-for-pay than for the challenge of it.

        jofzar 2 minutes ago

        It's silicon valley, literally everything is for pay or be homeless

  • danlitt 24 minutes ago

    > ethical approaches to model development, how humans interact with AI and debate over machine consciousness

    So, pseudo-philosophical mumbo jumbo. There is of course no-one responsible for the ethical framework of the company's actions, because it is a company, and therefore amoral at best and immoral at worst.

      kaon_2 9 minutes ago

      I am not sure in what neighbourhood you live, but in my village there are hundreds of businesses with strong morals. From the local baker, to the electrician and the construction company. Many keep employees past their prime, they all invest heavily in local community events and sports. The owners don't do this because of money, but because in their view a fulfilled life is one where you serve your community. And yes they want to become rich and make money, but that is not all.

      But it appears that is not how your world works. By default any company owner is a homo-sapiens, but a machine that only wants money. Tragically, your cynicism is creating the very world you hate.

        danlitt a minute ago

        Many people have strong morals, and might resist profit-maximising behaviours, but they will be outcompeted and replaced by less scrupulous people. There is actually no sharp difference between a person and a one-person-company, but: to the degree a company is really a company and not just a person, it is amoral. If you disagree, please point to a moral backstop that would prevent any company from taking immoral acts. A few exist, but they are invariably resisted by the most powerful companies. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

        thuuuomas 2 minutes ago

        Your neighborhood examples are on an incomparably smaller scale than Meta et al.

        It’s much easier to disregard the human cost of decisions when you are separated from said humans by thousands of miles & billions of dollars.

      greggsy 18 minutes ago

      I hate these companies as much as the next guy but this perspective is childish at best, and ignorant at worst.

        danlitt 9 minutes ago

        Which perspective? I said two things.

  • thenatureboy 28 minutes ago

    Good

  • roschdal 22 minutes ago

    Capitalism has not concept of ethics.

      lenerdenator 5 minutes ago

      Well, economics in general doesn't, but yes.

      There isn't much ethical merit in building a wall around a city with guard towers, attack dogs, and anti-personnel mines to keep the citizens in so that they can contribute to your economic vision, for example.