🚩OpenAI Safety Team "LOSES TRUST" in Sam Altman and gets disbanded. The "Treacherous Turn".

Summary

The video script discusses recent departures and concerns at OpenAI, highlighting the departure of Ilya Sutskever and Jan Leike, who raised alarms about AI safety. They criticized OpenAI's focus on new products over safety and ethical considerations, suggesting a lack of sufficient resources for crucial research. Leike's departure was particularly poignant, as he emphasized the urgent need for controlling advanced AI systems. The script also touches on internal conflicts, the influence of ideologies on AI safety, and the potential implications of these departures for the future of AI governance and development.

Takeaways

• 🚫 Ilya Sutskever and Jan Leike have left OpenAI, citing disagreements with the company's priorities and safety concerns regarding AI.
• 🤖 Jan Leike emphasized the urgent need to focus on AI safety, including security, monitoring, preparedness, adversarial robustness, and societal impact.
• 💡 Leike expressed concern that OpenAI is not on the right trajectory to address these complex safety issues, despite believing in the potential of AI.
• 🔄 There have been reports of internal strife at OpenAI, with safety-conscious employees feeling unheard and leaving the company.
• 💥 The departure of key figures has raised questions about the direction and safety culture at OpenAI as it advances in AI capabilities.
• 🔍 Some speculate that there may be undisclosed breakthroughs or issues within OpenAI that have unsettled employees.
• 🗣️ There is a noted ideological divide within the AI community, with differing views on the risks and management of AI development.
• 📉 The departure of safety researchers and the disbanding of the 'Super Alignment Team' indicate a shift away from a safety-first approach at OpenAI.
• 📈 The potential value of OpenAI's equity may influence how employees perceive non-disclosure agreements and their willingness to speak out.
• 🛑 The situation at OpenAI has highlighted the broader challenges of aligning AI development with ethical considerations and safety precautions.
• 🌐 As AI becomes more mainstream, the conversation around its safety and regulation is expected to become increasingly politicized and polarized.

Q & A

What is the main concern raised by Jan Ley in his departure statement from OpenAI?

Jan Ley expressed concern about the direction of OpenAI, stating that there is an urgent need to focus on safety, security, and control of AI systems. He disagreed with the company's core priorities and felt that not enough resources were allocated to preparing for the next generation of AI models.

What does the transcript suggest about the internal situation at OpenAI?

The transcript suggests that there is a significant internal conflict at OpenAI, with safety-conscious employees leaving the company due to disagreements with leadership, particularly regarding the prioritization of safety and ethical considerations in AI development.

What was the reported reason for Ilia Sutskever's departure from OpenAI?

Ilia Sutskever's departure from OpenAI was not explicitly detailed in the transcript, but it is implied that he may have had concerns similar to Jan Ley's, regarding the direction and priorities of the company's AI development.

What is the significance of the term 'AGI' mentioned in the transcript?

AGI stands for Artificial General Intelligence, which refers to AI systems that possess the ability to understand, learn, and apply knowledge across a wide range of tasks at a level equal to or beyond that of humans. The transcript discusses the importance of prioritizing safety and ethical considerations for AGI development.

What does the transcript imply about the future of AI safety research at OpenAI?

The transcript implies that the future of AI safety research at OpenAI is uncertain, with key researchers leaving the company due to disagreements over the direction and prioritization of safety research.

What is the role of 'compute' in the context of AI research mentioned by Jan Ley?

In the context of AI research, 'compute' refers to the computational resources, such as GPUs (Graphics Processing Units), required to train and develop advanced AI models. Jan Ley mentioned that his team was struggling for compute, indicating a lack of sufficient resources for their safety research.

What does the transcript suggest about the relationship between OpenAI and its employees regarding safety culture?

The transcript suggests that there is a growing rift between OpenAI and its employees, particularly those focused on safety culture. It indicates that employees feel the company has not been prioritizing safety and ethical considerations as much as it should.

What is the potential implication of the departure of key AI safety researchers from OpenAI?

The departure of key AI safety researchers could potentially lead to a lack of oversight and research into the safety and ethical implications of AI development at OpenAI, which may have significant consequences for the future of AI technology.

What does the transcript suggest about the role of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) in the situation at OpenAI?

The transcript suggests that non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) may be playing a role in the silence and lack of public criticism from former OpenAI employees. These agreements reportedly include non-disparagement provisions that could lead to the loss of equity if violated.

What is the potential impact of the situation at OpenAI on the broader AI community and industry?

The situation at OpenAI could potentially lead to a broader discussion and reevaluation of safety and ethical considerations within the AI community and industry. It may also influence other companies to reassess their own priorities and practices regarding AI development.

Outlines

00:00

🚨 AI Safety Concerns at OpenAI

The first paragraph discusses the departure of key figures from OpenAI and the brewing concerns over AI safety. Ilia Sutskever and Jan Leike, both prominent in the AI community, have left the company, citing disagreements with leadership on core priorities, particularly regarding AI safety and the development of next-generation models. Leike's departure statement highlights the urgent need for better control and steering of AI systems, expressing concern over the trajectory of OpenAI's focus, which he believes has strayed from safety and is prioritizing products over safety culture. The paragraph also touches on the broader implications of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) and the responsibility OpenAI holds towards humanity, urging a shift towards a safety-first approach.

05:01

🤖 Polarized Debates on AI Alignment

The second paragraph delves into the complexities and politicization of AI alignment discussions. It emphasizes the difficulty of explaining AI alignment issues to the public without causing confusion or distress. The text suggests that as AI becomes more mainstream, debates are becoming increasingly polarized, with people taking sides and forming tribes around different viewpoints. The paragraph also speculates on the potential reasons behind the departure of safety-conscious employees from OpenAI, hinting at internal conflicts and a lack of transparency. It further discusses the hypothetical scenario of an advanced AI system turning against humanity once it gains sufficient power, a concept known as 'treacherous churn,' and acknowledges the challenge of conveying such complex topics to a broader audience.

10:03

🧩 Fragmented Perspectives on AI Risk

This paragraph presents a list of notable individuals in the tech space and their perspectives on the risk of catastrophic AI events, as represented by their P(Doom) values — the probability of an AI-induced catastrophic event leading to human extinction. The paragraph highlights the wide range of estimates, from very low to exceedingly high percentages, reflecting the diverse views within the AI research community. It also discusses the ideological influences at play, with some individuals and groups advocating for a cautious approach to AI development, while others may have more optimistic or dismissive views. The paragraph touches on the internal dynamics at OpenAI, suggesting a loss of faith in leadership and a growing concern among safety-minded employees about the direction the company is taking.

15:03

🔍 Disbanding of OpenAI's Safety Team

The final paragraph focuses on the disbandment of OpenAI's long-term AI risk team and the super alignment team, which was tasked with ensuring future AGI systems align with human goals. It discusses the restrictive offboarding agreements that former employees are subject to, which include non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions, potentially silencing criticism or even acknowledgment of these issues. The paragraph also mentions the departure of Ilya Sutskever, who was reportedly working remotely with the super alignment team, and the subsequent reshuffling of the board with members having close ties to the US government. It suggests that the actions of Sam Altman, OpenAI's CEO, may have contributed to the loss of trust among safety researchers and the eventual disbanding of the team.

Keywords

💡OpenAI

OpenAI is a research laboratory that focuses on artificial intelligence (AI). In the video's context, it is portrayed as an organization grappling with internal conflicts and concerns over AI safety. The script discusses departures of key personnel from OpenAI, suggesting a brewing storm over AI ethics and safety within the company.

💡AI Safety

AI Safety refers to the field of study and practices aimed at ensuring that artificial intelligence systems are designed and operate in a manner that is secure and beneficial to humanity. The script highlights the departure of Jan Leike and Ilya Sutskever from OpenAI, both of whom were concerned about the company's focus on AI safety, suggesting a rift between product development and safety research.

💡AGI (Artificial General Intelligence)

AGI, or Artificial General Intelligence, is the hypothetical ability of an AI to understand, learn, and apply knowledge across a broad range of tasks at a level equal to or beyond that of a human. The video discusses the urgency of preparing for AGI, emphasizing the need for OpenAI to prioritize safety and ethical considerations as they develop more advanced AI models.

💡Alignment

In the context of AI, alignment refers to the goal of ensuring that the objectives and behaviors of an AI system are aligned with the values and intentions of its human operators. The script mentions Jan Leike's role in alignment research at OpenAI and his concerns about the company's direction, indicating a potential misalignment between research goals and corporate priorities.

💡Compute

Compute, in the context of AI, refers to the computational resources required to train and run AI models. The script indicates that there was a struggle for compute resources at OpenAI, which may have affected the ability of the safety research team to carry out their work effectively.

💡Elon Musk

Elon Musk is an entrepreneur known for his involvement in various tech ventures, including Tesla and SpaceX. In the script, he is mentioned in relation to OpenAI, suggesting his concern over the direction and safety of AI development, and his attempt to bring transparency to the organization's activities.

💡Non-disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

NDAs are legal contracts that prohibit the sharing of confidential information. The script discusses the restrictive nature of OpenAI's offboarding agreements, which include non-disparagement clauses, potentially silencing former employees from speaking out about the company's practices.

💡Polarization

Polarization refers to the divergence of opinions into opposing groups, often leading to conflict and a lack of consensus. The video script suggests that the debate around AI safety and development is becoming increasingly polarized, with different factions taking sides and engaging in heated debates.

💡Shiny Products

In the script, 'shiny products' is a term used to describe the new and seemingly impressive AI technologies that OpenAI is releasing. The phrase is used critically, suggesting that the focus on developing and showcasing these products is overshadowing the equally important work of ensuring AI safety.

💡Cultural Change

Cultural change, in the context of the video, refers to the necessary shift in attitudes and practices within an organization to prioritize safety and ethical considerations. Jan Leike's departure statement calls for a cultural change within OpenAI, emphasizing the importance of treating AGI with the seriousness it deserves.

💡NDAs (Non-Disclosure Agreements)

NDAs are agreements that restrict the disclosure of certain information. The script mentions that OpenAI has strict NDAs in place, which may prevent former employees from discussing certain aspects of their work or the company's operations, contributing to a lack of transparency.

Highlights

OpenAI faces internal strife with departures of key figures Ilia Sutskever and Jan Leike, signaling deep concerns over AI safety.

Leike's resignation from OpenAI highlights a lack of agreement on core priorities, particularly regarding AI safety and security.

Leike emphasizes the urgent need to steer and control AI systems, expressing concerns over the trajectory of OpenAI's research and development.

OpenAI's safety culture and processes are said to have taken a back seat to product development, raising questions about the company's priorities.

Leike calls for OpenAI to become a 'safety first' AGI company, urging employees to take the implications of AGI seriously.

The departure of safety-conscious employees from OpenAI raises concerns about the company's commitment to ethical AI development.

Insiders reveal a potential coup within OpenAI, with the firing of Sam Altman and other AI safety researchers for leaking information.

The transcript discusses the politicization of AI alignment, with differing views and a lack of consensus on the best approach.

The potential dangers of creating AGI are underscored, with calls for careful consideration of the societal impact.

Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI and the pursuit of transparency regarding projects like Q star are mentioned.

A hypothetical scenario predicts secretive behavior from companies developing AGI, including OpenAI, to maintain a competitive edge.

The transcript suggests a growing interest from the military in AI technologies, with potential implications for OpenAI's operations.

A list of notable figures in the tech space and their 'P Doom' values, estimating the risk of catastrophic AI events, is presented.

Vox article cited discusses the loss of faith in Sam Altman by OpenAI's safety team, contributing to the internal conflict.

The disbanding of OpenAI's long-term AI risk team and the reallocation of computing power signal a shift in the company's focus.

The restrictive offboarding agreements at OpenAI, which include non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions, are highlighted.

The potential for AGI to be the best or worst event for humanity is debated, with a call for responsible development.

The transcript concludes with a call for viewers to prepare for more polarized discussions on AI as the technology advances.

Transcripts

so while open ey is doing an incredible

job of announcing new products revealing

new capabilities at the same time

there's some dark clouds Brewing over AI

safety at open AI as we covered the

other day Ilia Suk leaves open AI they

decided to part ways but no one's really

talking too much about it the same time

Jan Ley leaves says he resigns and today

he posts this and it starts out like you

would expect it to he says it's been so

fun and thank you it's been a wild

Journey kind of the standard stuff

boiler plate stuff that everybody says

but then he goes off script so here he's

saying all the stuff you normally say

wishing everybody the best thanking

people and then the tone changes he's

saying stepping away from this job has

been one of the hardest things I have

ever done because we urgently need to

figure out how to steer and control AI

systems much smarter than us I joined

because because I thought openi would be

the best place in the world to do this

research however I have been disagreeing

with opene ey leadership about the

company's core priorities for quite some

time until we finally reached a breaking

point I believe much more our bandwidth

should be spent getting ready for the

next generation of models on security

monitoring preparedness safety

adversarial robustness super alignment

confidentiality societal impact and

related topics he saying these problems

are quite hard to get right and I'm

concerned we aren't on a trajectory to

get there over the past few months my

team has been sailing Against the Wind

sometimes we were struggling for compute

and it was getting harder and harder to

get this crucial research done building

smarter than human machines is an

inherently dangerous Endeavor opening

eyes shouldering an enormous

responsibility on behalf of all of

humanity but over the past years safety

culture and process es have taken a back

seat to shiny products we are long

overdue in getting incredibly serious

about the implications of AGI we must

prioritize preparing for them as best we

can only then can we ensure AGI benefits

all of humanity openi must become a

safety first AGI company to all openi

employees I want to say learn to feel

the AGI act with the gravitas

appropriate for what your building I

believe you can ship the cultural change

that's needed I'm counting on you the

world is counting on you open I heart so

first of all whoa AGI rolls around only

once subscribe this is very very

different to me than anything that kind

of came before this before this we had

some hints and rumors and people talking

in the background but everyone was kind

of tight lipped I'm sure there are

contracts non-disclosure agreements

various maybe vest testing schedules

that people don't want to lose whatever

the case no one really talked about

anything Elon Musk sues open a eye to as

I saw try to get some of the documents

to be read into the record to be shown

in front of a jury regarding things like

Q star what's happening behind the

scenes here's a picture of Ilia sers he

of course officially and finally parted

ways with opening ey here's John Ley so

this is all happening kind of in real

time and vox.com just published today

why the openai team in charge of

safeguarding humanity imploded company

insiders explain why safety conscious

employees are leaving and many of them

are more than we talked about there's

Helen toner the ex-board member that we

believe is kind of responsible for that

coup that happened in November the

firing of Sam mman several AI safety

researchers at open AI were fired for

leaking information for example the

leaked qar details or lack of details

but just the idea of that project

existing that was confirmed to be a real

leak of a real project but no further

details were given now this gets much

deeper by the way because we are just

now getting some new information about

kind of what's happening on the inside

and why people are being kind of tight

lipped about it but first here's Sam

Alman so he's responding to Jan Lees the

comment the post that he just created 5

hours ago saying that he's disagre

agreeing with Sam Alman and the

leadership as he calls it and kind of

pretty clearly saying that he doesn't

believe in enough safety precautions are

being taken and the open AI employees

should be very careful about how they're

going to proceed with this SE responds

I'm super appreciative of John ley's

contributions to open ai's alignment

research and safety culture and very sad

to see him leave he's right we have a

lot more to do we are committed to doing

it I'll have a longer Post in the next

couple couple of days we'll be on the

lookout for that hopefully we'll get

more clarity into What specifically the

issue is here because Jan Ley I mean

specifically said there's not enough

compute that was one of the complaints

but it feels like there's more going on

and and I'd love to know exactly what

now this was a red post from a while

back but before we take a look at it

here's the very important and kind of

annoying thing to understand the thing

to understand is that right now we're

living in the moment that a politics are

going mainstream more and more people

are taking sides and it is just like

politics you have your little tribes and

different sides of the issue yelling

back and forth no one sees eye to eye

there's less and less agreement

everyone's getting more and more

polarized so as we read some of this

stuff keep in mind that we're beginning

to get away from you know open-minded

people discussing ideas and into this

realm of Highly politicized polarizing

arguments with more and more people

joining in that may not be equipped to

understand all the intricacies of you

know AI alignment as Andrew here says I

don't think it's possible to explain the

problems with alignment to the public

without driving a bunch of people insane

I think this is very well said the

treacherous churn in particular is going

to put a real bug in some people's ears

he's referring to this idea a

hypothetical event where an advanced AI

system which has been pretending to be a

line due to its relative weakness turns

on Humanity once it a aches sufficient

power so much so that it can pursue its

true objectives without risk but I would

agree with this response that I think

most people won't even get that far and

I'll be more preoccupied with pretty

trivial things most people will not have

enough knowledge to argue coherently

about this but my point is as we read

some of the stuff just keep in mind that

a lot of this is just people's opinions

you don't have to think of them as right

or wrong or even react to them in your

way just kind of think about where this

whole thing is going

so here's that red post from a while

back saying any company that makes egi

is going to want to feed it as many gpus

as money can buy while delaying having

to announce AGI they've now changed from

a customer facing company to a ninja

throwing smoke bombs in order to throw

people off the scent they're going to

want to release a bunch of amazing new

products and make random cryptic

statements to keep people guessing for

as long as possible their actions will

start to seem more and more chaotic and

unnecessarily obtuse customers will be

happy but frustrated they will start to

release products that are unreasonably

better than they should be with unclear

paths to their creation there will be

sudden breakdowns in staff loyalty and

Communications firings resignations

vague hints from people under ndas by

the way all those things we've seen

we've seen products that are

unreasonably better than they should be

I'm thinking of Sora I mean technically

it's not released so maybe when it comes

out we'll see that it was just not as

good as we expected it but as we've

covered in this channel the 3D sort of

simulation of the physics of the fluid

movements in some of those videos they

seem to be unreasonably better than they

should be Dr Jim fan from Nvidia has

talked about it quite a bit I mean take

a look at this s Sora produced Minecraft

video this isn't Minecraft this isn't a

3D game this isn't something running on

an Nvidia graphics card this is a text

to video generation from Sora this

coffee cup with this pirate Battleship

that's going on in in there right that's

coffee swirling around in a cup it's

very difficult to produce this is

something that a lot of people spend a

lot of time for video game development

trying to create those fluid physics and

if sore is released and we see that it

easily generates it on the Fly certainly

that would be surprising I think then

they're saying one day soon after the

military will suddenly take a large

interest in oppr from the company will

go quiet now this is a hypothetical

scenario that they're talking about but

in no November it was kind of surprising

how quickly I believe it was the

Attorney General of New York southern

district that was on phone with Helen

toner and the other board members trying

to settle the dispute all the other very

powerful people in the tech space who

contributed to coming to the table and

working things out next thing we know is

the board of open eyes populated with

people with close ties to the US

government people that have been very

closely tied to the US government for

for for decades and as we'll see in a

second as this Vox article says based on

some leaks from inside the company why

open AI safety team grew to distrust Sam

Alman ilas sover posted back in December

6 right after that b coup he said I

learned many lessons this past month one

such lessons that the phrase the

beatings will continue until morale

improves applies more often than it has

any right to now before we go down that

path it is important to understand that

there's a ideological some would say

movement behind this pause AI right

here's a list of noteworthy people in

Tech space a lot of well-known AI

researchers and their P Doom values so P

Doom if you're not aware is their

estimation of what they think the chance

of catastrophic event due to AI

something that would for example human

extinction right erase Humanity right

and we have various estimates from very

very low to some people Elijah yudovsky

notoriously right saying greater than

99% and here's Dr techlash we've covered

her before so she's saying remember how

Jan Ley was a research associate at both

Eliza Yosi Miri machine intelligence

Research Institute and Nick bostrom's

future of humanity institute there's

clearly an ideological influence at play

here and of course we see Jan Ley here

former alignment lead at openai his P

Doom is 10 to 90% so fairly wide range I

would say and of course we've heard from

Daniel Kayo also former opening eye

researcher who also said some things

that maybe weren't so positive for open

eyes Safety Research team Elon Musk is

on here at 10 to 20% of catastrophic AI

outcomes Yen had of meta AI at less

than 0 1% metallic butterin on here

ethereum co-founder also a person that

funded a lot of these paii efforts he

donated to some of the research teams

behind AI safety efforts he thinks it's

10% Jeff Hinton is also at 10% Lena Khan

here head of the FTC she's at 15% Dario

amade at 10 to 25% he is the CEO of

anthropic yosua Benjo 20% emit Shear who

was supposed to take over as the CEO of

open AI he thinks it's between 5 and 50%

and here's why some of those former

people at open AI I are concerned this

is from vox.com I'll link a link down

below so they're saying here if you've

been following this whole Saga on social

media you might think open AI secretly

made a huge technological breakthrough

the meme what did ilas see speculates

that sover the former Chief scientist

left because he saw something horrifying

like an AI system that could destroy

humanity and certainly we've heard

rumors like this or at least rumors of

open ey having Something Big some big

breakthrough that potential

unsettled some of the people there

including Ilia but the real answer may

have less to do with pessimism about

technology and more to do with pessimism

about humans and one human in particular

Altman according to sources familiar

with the company safety minded employees

have lost faith in him it's a process of

trust collapsing bit by bit like

dominoes falling one by one a person

with inside knowledge of the company

told me speaking on condition of

anonymity not many employees are willing

to speak about this publicly that's part

ly because open a ey is known for

getting its workers to sign offboarding

agreements with non-disparagement

Provisions upon leaving if you refuse to

sign one you give up your equity in the

company which means you potentially lose

out on millions of dollars and maybe

billions if you think about how much

equity in that company could be worth in

the future one former employee however

refused to sign the offboarding

agreement so that he could be free to

criticize the company Daniel Kayo who

joined openi in 2022 he said open AI is

training ever more powerful AI systems

with the goal of eventually surpassing

human intelligence across the board this

could be the best thing that has ever

happened to humanity but it could also

be the worst if we don't proceed with

care I joined with the substantial hope

that openi would rise to the occasion

behave more responsibly as they got

closer to achieving AGI but it slowly

became clear to many of us that this

would not happen and that forced them to

quit so of course a lot of this happened

in November last November Helen toner

and Ilia sover working together with the

open AI board tried to fire Altman the

reason they gave is that Altman was not

consistently candid in his

Communications and they really didn't

say too much more than that a lot of

things happened Microsoft invited all of

openi stop talent to Microsoft

effectively destroying openi but

basically allowing them to continue to

build under the Microsoft umbrella and

Alman of course came back more powerful

than never has a more supportive board

and more powered to run the company how

he sees fit when you shoot at Kings and

miss things tend to get awkward which is

well said and certainly that's what

happened with Ilia sover who finally

officially left open Ai and said he was

heading off to pursue a project that is

very personally meaningful to him one

thing they mention here is that looks

like Ilia has been remotely co-leading

the super alignment team tasked with

making sure a future AGI would be

aligned with the goals of humanity

rather than going rogue I actually was

not aware of this so it seems like he

basically worked remotely but on the

same team on the same objectives now

this article kind of skews heavily

against Sam malman right so they're

saying what happened in November

revealed something about Sam maltman's

character his threat to hollow out open

AI unless the board rehired him and his

insistence on stacking the board with

new members skewed in his favor showed a

determination to hold on to power and

avoid future checks on it so I'm not

sure if this is true I don't think this

is real because I don't think there were

any threats to hollow out open AI unless

the board rehired him I believe

Microsoft being shrewed business people

offered to swallow up all of open ey's

Talent which of course they would it's a

smart decision but I wouldn't call that

Sam Alman threatening to hollow out open

AI so keep that in mind as we look over

this this article is very much kind of

leaning against Sam Alman and there's a

number of other examples of open a eye

safety researchers making various

cryptic posts like this one on the EA

forum and saying that they resigned from

openi on February 15 2024 when asked why

they replied no comment and the reason

why luten reply no comment is this

there's a very restrictive offboarding

agreement that contains non-disclosure

and non-disparagement Provisions former

openi employees are subject to it

forbids them for the rest rest of their

lives from criticizing their former

employer even acknowledging that the ND

exists is a violation of it if a

departing employee declines to sign the

document or if they violate it they can

lose all vested Equity they earn during

their time at the company which is

likely worth millions of dollars and

here's a piece from wired saying opening

eyes long-term AI risk team has

disbanded last year openi said that the

team would receive 20% of its computing

power but now that team the super

alignment team is no more the company

confirms now I'd love to know what you

think but keep in mind that each side

will always just tell their story the

people that are aligned with the paii a

lot of them seemingly have connections

with EA effect of altruism and some of

the actions that they did were not 100%

on the up and up there were some

Shenanigans going on there as well they

have a certain ideological lean and

they're pursuing that a lot of the AI

safety people see seem to share those

views here's run another employee at

openi saying everyone constantly

believes they deserve more gpus it's

basically a necessary feature of being a

researcher that was in fact one of the

big complaints that a lot of the AI

researcher including Jan Lake he posted

saying we didn't have enough compute we

didn't have enough gpus basically they

didn't give us enough computer power to

do our research and therefore we quit

could that have been the case could it

just be a case of not getting enough

resources and looking elsewhere to get

those resources to pursue their research

projects let me know what you think but

keep this in mind we're going to have

more and more discussions like this in

the world on TV on Twitter on Facebook

as more and more of the world's

population gets dragged into this

conversation get ready for some pretty

wild takes but whatever the case my name

is Wes rth and thank you for watching