OpenAI's Altman and Makanju on Global Implications of AI

Summary

在这段对话中，OpenAI的代表讨论了他们如何在政治竞选中禁止使用ChatGPT，并引入加密水印以确保AI生成图像的透明度和真实性。他们强调了强大的安全系统和与国家秘书协会的合作，以提供权威的投票信息。讨论还涉及到对即将到来的民主选举的关注，以及OpenAI从早期科技循环中学到的经验。他们还提到了与美国国防部合作的可能性，但明确表示禁止开发武器。最后，对话探讨了AI在政府和监管方面的应用，以及如何确保技术的安全和负责任的使用。

Takeaways

• 🚫 OpenAI宣布了关于AI在选举中使用的新指导原则，包括禁止ChatGPT在政治活动中的使用和引入加密水印来增加AI生成图像的透明度。
• 🤝 OpenAI强调了与安全系统团队和国家秘书协会等重要合作伙伴关系在执行这些指导原则中的重要性。
• 📈 OpenAI对即将到来的重要民主选举保持高度关注，并承诺将尽一切可能确保安全和公正。
• 🔍 OpenAI利用自身的AI工具和团队监控以扩展其执行能力，提供一个竞争优势。
• 🤔 尽管面临执行挑战，OpenAI强调了自成立以来一直在考虑这些问题的重要性。
• 🗳️ OpenAI正在与政府机构合作，提供权威的投票信息，以增强选举过程中的透明度和公平性。
• 🌍 OpenAI认识到AI技术的潜在影响，并致力于与分发平台合作，确保AI技术的安全和负责任使用。
• 🔧 对于AI在工作场所的影响，OpenAI观察到AI技术更多地改变了工作方式，而不是直接取代工作。
• 💡 OpenAI强调了教育和合作的重要性，以确保各方对AI技术的潜力和挑战有一个全面和平衡的理解。
• 🌱 尽管存在对AI技术可能加剧社会不平等的担忧，OpenAI指出AI实际上是一个提高生产力和创造力的工具，而非简单地取代人类工作。

Q & A

GPT-4相比前代GPT有什么突破?

Sam表示GPT-4在多方面有所进步,包括能处理更通用的任务,但是仍有很多局限性。按他的预测,未来版本如GPT-5到GPT-6会有指数级的进步。

ChatGPT的商店有哪些应用?

用户创建了各种各样的ChatGPT扩展以自定义其功能和行为。比较流行的有规划旅行的应用和查资料的应用。

训练大规模语言模型需要大量算力和能源。这是否会成为环境问题?

Sam承认大规模语言模型确实需要消耗大量算力和能源。他希望通过新技术如核聚变来获得清洁能源以满足这一需求。

政府监管AI发展会不会扼杀创业和创新?

Anna认为这是业界担忧的一个问题。她建议监管要兼顾促进发展和管理风险。

ChatGPT的成功对行业意味着什么?

它让更多普通大众了解AI,也展现了作为工具辅助人类的巨大潜力。

Outlines

00:00

📢 新AI使用指南发布

这段讨论了某公司宣布新的AI使用指南，特别是在选举中的应用。这些指南包括禁止在政治竞选中使用ChatGPT，以及为DALL·E生成的图像引入加密水印以确保透明度和来源追踪。面对如Facebook、TikTok和YouTube等大平台在执行类似原则时的挑战，该公司利用自身的安全系统和工具来加强执行力度，并通过与国家秘书协会等组织的合作，提供权威的投票信息。讨论还触及了OpenAI在确保AI技术不会在重要选举中造成负面影响方面的努力，以及对未来的担忧和预防措施。

05:00

🔍 AI在政治竞选中的角色探讨

这一部分深入探讨了AI技术在政治竞选中的使用情况，特别是其对选举策略和舆论形成的影响。强调了尽管AI技术在选举中的具体应用尚未成为主要议题，但其潜力和影响力不容忽视。此外，讨论了技术发展如何改变人们工作的方式，而非直接替代就业，以及AI如何成为提高生产力的工具。最后，讨论了OpenAI在军事项目中使用AI的政策调整，强调了在不促进武器开发的前提下，与国防部合作开发网络安全工具的例子。

10:01

🌐 AI技术的安全与监管

讨论转向了AI技术的安全性和监管问题，特别是在自杀预防和军事应用方面的潜在用途。提到了OpenAI对军事使用的严格限制，尽管如此，公司与美国国防部合作开发网络安全工具，以保护关键基础设施。此外，这一段还探讨了OpenAI如何利用其技术来促进创新，同时保持对社会负责任的态度。

15:04

🎨 对DALL·E技术的艺术家反馈

这一部分关注了艺术家社区对DALL·E技术的反馈，以及OpenAI如何响应这些反馈。强调了与艺术家合作的重要性，尤其是在尊重他们的风格和选择不训练特定艺术家数据的基础上。讨论了未来可能允许艺术家通过售卖或以其他方式经济受益于以他们风格生成的作品的潜力。

20:04

🔧 AI技术的应用与影响

这部分探讨了AI技术，特别是ChatGPT和DALL·E，如何影响人类的工作和创造力。提到了GPT技术使程序员等专业人士的工作效率显著提高，同时强调了技术发展如何推动社会和职业角色的变化。此外，讨论了AI技术在军事和安全领域应用的拓展，以及OpenAI对其政策的调整以适应这些新的用途。

25:05

🌍 AI技术的社会和环境挑战

在这一段中，讨论了AI技术发展对社会和环境的挑战，特别是在能源消耗和气候变化方面。提到了AI技术对能源的巨大需求，以及这一需求可能对全球气候产生的影响。同时，讨论了解决这些挑战所需的技术突破，如核聚变和更高效的太阳能技术。

30:06

📅 AI发展的未来展望

这一部分提出了对AI技术未来发展的展望，特别是在实现通用人工智能（AGI）方面。讨论了技术进步的非线性特性，以及如何在保持谨慎的同时，避免对未来的过度恐惧。强调了逐步迭代开发技术的重要性，以便社会和政策能够适应这些变化。

Keywords

💡AI安全

AI安全指的是确保人工智能系统的开发、部署和使用过程中不会对人类社会造成伤害或不良影响的措施和实践。在视频中，讨论了OpenAI实施的新准则，如加入加密水印以提高AI生成图像的透明度，这些都是为了增强AI使用中的安全性和透明度。这表明了在AI技术快速发展的同时，确保其安全使用是企业和社会普遍关心的问题。

💡加密水印

加密水印是指在AI生成的图像或内容中嵌入隐形标记，以标识该内容为AI生成，从而增加内容的透明度和可追溯性。在视频中提到，OpenAI引入了加密水印技术，旨在创建一个能够追溯和透明使用AI生成图像的环境，这有助于区分人工创作和机器生成的内容，提高了信息的诚信度。

💡民主选举

民主选举指的是通过公平竞争的选举过程选出代表或领导的政治过程。视频中提到了对于使用AI技术可能会在民主选举中产生影响的担忧，尤其是在信息传播和选民影响方面，强调了OpenAI对于不在政治竞选中使用其技术的立场，体现了对民主过程完整性的重视。

💡伙伴关系

伙伴关系在视频中指的是OpenAI与各国家秘书协会等机构建立的合作关系，旨在确保选举信息的权威性和准确性。通过这种合作，OpenAI能够在保证AI技术安全、负责任地使用的同时，为公众提供准确的投票信息，展示了企业与政府间在技术应用方面的协同努力。

💡技术监管

技术监管是指政府或相关机构对科技产品和服务实施的规则和标准。视频中提到了关于AI技术尤其是在选举中使用的监管问题，展现了OpenAI通过与政府机构合作，确保其技术在符合监管要求的同时，也能有效服务于社会公众。

💡迭代部署

迭代部署是指逐步推出新技术或产品版本的过程，每一次迭代都在前一版本的基础上进行改进和优化。视频中提到OpenAI采取迭代部署的方式来发布其AI模型，这种方法不仅可以及时收集用户反馈进行改进，还可以在确保安全和责任的前提下，逐步扩大技术的应用范围和影响力。

💡社会共生

社会共生指的是技术与社会环境相互适应、共同进步的关系。视频中讨论了AI技术如何与社会共生，即通过迭代部署和不断的社会适应过程，使AI技术更好地服务于人类，促进社会的整体发展和进步。

💡人工智能研究

人工智能研究涉及到AI技术的基础理论、算法开发以及应用实践等多个方面。视频中提到OpenAI在人工智能领域的研究，包括通过不断迭代的AI模型来推动技术进步，以及与政府、行业合作伙伴共同探索AI技术的安全和负责任使用。

💡技术透明度

技术透明度指的是向公众清晰地展示技术工作原理、使用影响和可能的风险。视频中OpenAI通过引入加密水印和与政府合作等措施，提高了AI生成内容的透明度，体现了对公众权益的重视和对技术负责任的态度。

💡工具而非实体

工具而非实体在视频中强调了AI技术是作为人类活动的辅助工具而存在，而不是自主的、有自我意识的实体。这个概念有助于塑造公众对AI技术的正确理解，认识到AI的作用是扩展人类能力和创造性，而不是取代人类。

Highlights

开放AI最近公布了有关AI在选举中使用的新准则

开放AI禁止在政治活动中使用Chat GPT

开放AI能够利用自己的工具来扩大执行范围

开放AI正在与美国国防部合作开发网络安全工具

开放AI认为民主国家需要在该技术上处于领先地位

GPT Store中出现了大量创造性和垃圾内容,就像移动应用商店的早期一样

开放AI与出版商的关系对其业务很重要,但与人们普遍认为的不同

开放AI的董事会应该对11月发生的行政命令负责

开放AI的团队和投资者致力于开放AI的使命

AI的训练和推理工作负载需要大量能源,这可能与气候变化的反向发展背道而驰

AI和通用AI的发展路径需要与社会的发展同步迭代

GPT-4只是一个预览,GPT-5的进步可能超过人们的想象

AI可以成为一个工具而不是一个产品或实体,这一认识令人欣喜

设计方式和产品方式确实很重要,以使技术更人性化

AI技术和产品的设计方式应该与人更契合,使其感觉不那么神秘或可怕

Transcripts

you guys made some news today announcing

some new guidelines around the use of AI

in elections I'm sure it's all uh stuff

that the the the davo set loved to hear

uh you banned the use of chat GPT in

political campaigns you introduced

cryptographic watermarks or images

created by do to to create kind of

Providence and transparency around the

use of AI generated images I read it and

I thought you know this is great some of

these principles are shared by much

larger platforms like Facebook and Tik

Tok and YouTube and they have struggled

to enforce it how do

you make it

real I mean these a lot of these are

things that we've been doing for a long

time and we have a really strong safety

systems team that um not only sort of

has monitoring but we're actually able

to leverage our own tools in order to

scale our enforcement which gives us I

think a significant Advantage um but uh

so there this there also some some

really important Partnerships like with

the National Association with the

secretaries of state so we can Surface

authoritative voting information so we

have quite a few ways that we are able

to enforce this mean Sam are you does

this put your mind at ease that we don't

that that open AI doesn't move the

needle in in some 77 upcoming critical

Democratic elections in 2024 no we're

quite focused on it uh and I think it's

good that our mind is not at EAS I think

it's good that we have a lot of anxiety

and are going to do everything we can to

get it as right as we can um I think our

role is very different than the role of

a distribution platform but still

important we'll have to work with them

too uh it'll you know it's like you

generate here and distribute here uh and

there needs to be a good conversation

between them but we also have the

benefit of having watched what's

happened in previous Cycles with

previous uh you know Technologies and I

don't think this will be the same as

before I I think it's always a mistake

to try to fight the last war but we do

get to take away some learnings from

that

and so I I wouldn't you know I I think

it'd be terrible if I said oh yeah I'm

not worried I feel great like we're

going to have to watch this incredibly

closely this year super tight monitoring

super tight feedback loop Anna you you

were at Facebook for open

AI so so I almost apologize for asking

it this in this way uh probably a

trigger phrase but do you worry about

another Cambridge analytical analytica

moment I think as Sam alluded to there

are a lot of learnings that we can

leverage but also open the eye from its

Inception has been a company that thinks

about these issues that it was one of

the reasons that it was founded so I

think I'm a lot less concerned because

these are issues that our teams have

been thinking about from the beginning

of uh our building of these tools Sam

Donald Trump just won the Iowa caucus

yesterday uh we are now sort of

confronted with the reality of this

upcoming election what do you think is

at

stake in the in the US election for for

Tech and for the safe stewardship of AI

do you feel like that's a a critical

issue that voters should and will have

to consider in this election I think the

now confronted as part of the problem uh

I actually think most people who come to

D say that again I didn't quite get that

I think part of the problem is we're

saying we're now confronted you know it

never occurred to us that what Trump is

saying might be resonating with a lot of

people and now all of a sudden after

this performance in Iowa oh man um it's

a very like Davos Centric you know um

I've been here for two days I guess

just uh so I I would love if we had a

lot more reflection and if we started it

a lot sooner um about and we didn't feel

now confronted but uh I think there's a

lot at stake at this election I think

elections are you know huge deals I

believe that America is going to be fine

no matter what happens in this election

I believe that AI is going to be fine no

matter what happens in this election and

we will have to work very hard to make

it so um but this is not you know no one

wants to sit up here and like hear me

rant about politics I'm going to stop

after this um but I think there has been

a real failure to sort of learn lessons

about what what's kind of like working

for the citizens of America and what's

not Anna I want to ask you the same

question uh um you know taking your

political background into account what

do you feel like for Silicon Valley for

AI is at stake in the US election I

think what has struck me and has been

really remarkable is that the

conversation around AI has remained very

bipartisan and so you know I think that

the one concern I have is that somehow

both parties hate

it no but you know this is like an area

where um

you Republicans tend to of course have a

an approach where they are not as in

favor of Regulation but on this I think

there's agreement on both parties that

they are consider they believe that

something is needed on this technology

you know Senator Schumer has this

bipartisan effort that he is running

with his Republican counterparts again

uh when we speak to people in DC on both

sides of the aisle for now it seems like

they're on the same page and do you feel

like all the existing campaigns are

equally articulate about the about the

issues relating to Ai No know that AI

has really been a campaign issue to date

so it will be interesting to see how

that if we're right about what's going

to happen here this is like bigger than

just a technological re ution in some

sense I mean sort of like all

technological revolutions or societal

revolutions but this one feels like it

can be much more of that than usual and

so it it is going to become uh a social

issue a political issue um it already

has in some ways but I think it is

strange to both of us that it's not more

of that already but with what we expect

to happen this year not with the

election but just with the the increase

in the capabilities of the products uh

and as people really

catch up with what's going to happen

what is happening what's already

happened uh there's like a lot of a Nur

always in society well I mean there are

political figures in the US and around

the world like Donald Trump who have

successfully tapped into a feeling of

yeah

dislocation uh anger of the working

class the feeling of you know

exacerbating inequality or technology

leaving people behind is there the

danger that uh you know AI furthers

those Trends yes for sure I think that's

something to think about but one of the

things that surprised us very pleasantly

on the upside uh cuz you know when you

start building a technology you start

doing research you you kind of say well

we'll follow where the science leads us

and when you put a product you'll say

this is going to co-evolve with society

and we'll follow where users lead us but

it's not you get you get to steer it but

only somewhat there's some which is just

like this is what the technology can do

this is how people want to use it and

this is what it's capable of and this

has been much more of a tool than I

think we expected it is not yet and

again in the future it'll it'll get

better but it's not yet like replacing

jobs in the way to the degree that

people thought it was going to it is

this incredible tool for productivity

and you can see people magnifying what

they can do um by a factor of two or

five or in some way that doesn't even

talk to makes sense to talk about a

number because they just couldn't do the

things at all before and that is I think

quite exciting this this new vision of

the future that we didn't really see

when we started we kind of didn't know

how it was going to go and very thankful

the technology did go in this direction

but where this is a tool that magnifies

what humans do lets people do their jobs

better lets the AI do parts of jobs and

of course jobs will change and of course

some jobs will totally go away but the

human drives are so strong and the sort

of way that Society works is so strong

that I think and I can't believe I'm

saying this because it would have

sounded like an ungrammatical sentence

to me at some point but I think AGI will

get developed in the reasonably

close-ish future and it'll change the

world much less than we all think it'll

change jobs much less than we all think

and again that sounds I may be wrong

again now but that wouldn't have even

compiled for me as a sentence at some

point given my conception then of how

AGI was going to go as you've watched

the technology develop have you both

changed your views on how significant

the job dislocation and disruption will

be as AGI comes into Focus so this is

actually an area that we know we have a

policy research team that studies this

and they've seen pretty significant

impact in terms of changing the way

people do jobs rather than job

dislocation and I think that's actually

going to accelerate and that it's going

to change more people's jobs um but as

Sam said so far it hasn't been the

significant a replacement of jobs you

know you hear a coder say okay I'm like

two times more productive three times

more productive whatever than they used

to be and I like can never code again

without this tool you mostly hear that

from the younger ones but

um it turns out and I think this will be

true for a lot of Industries the world

just needs a lot more code than we have

people to write right now and so it's

not like we run out of demand it's that

people can just do more expectations go

up but ability goes up

too goes up I want to ask you about

another news report today that suggested

that open AI was relaxing its

restrictions around the use of AI in

military projects and developing weapons

can you say more about that and you what

work are you doing with the US

Department of Defense and other military

agencies so a lot of these policies were

written um before we even knew what

these people would use our tools for so

what this was not actually just the

adjustment of the military use case

policies but across the board to make it

more clear so that people understand

what is possible what is not possible

but specifically on this um area we

actually still prohibit the development

of weapons um the destruction of

property harm to individuals but for

example we've been doing work with the

Department of Defense on um cyber

security tools for uh open source

software that secures critical

infrastructure we've been exploring

whether it can assist with veteran

suicide and because we previously had a

what essentially was a blanket

prohibition on Military many people felt

like that would have prohibited any of

these use cases which we think are very

much aligned with what we want to see in

the world has the US government asked

you to restrict the level of cooperation

with uh militaries in other

countries um they haven't asked us but

we certainly are not you know right for

now actually our discussion are focused

on um United States national security

agencies and um you know I think we have

always believed that democracies need to

be in the lead on this technology uh Sam

changing topics uh give us an update on

the GPT store and are you seeing maybe

probably explain it briefly and are you

seeing the same kind of explosion of

creativity we saw in the early days of

the mobile app stores yeah the same

level of creativity and the same level

of crap but it I mean that happens in

the early days as people like feel out a

technology there's some incredible stuff

in there too um give us an example the

gpts should I say what gpts are first

yeah sure um so gpts are a way to do a

very lightweight customization of chat

GPT and if you want it to behave in a

particular way to use particular data to

be able to call out to an external

service um you can make this thing and

you can do all sorts of like uh great

stuff with it um and then we just

recently launched a store where you can

see what other people have built and you

can share it and um I mean personally

one that I have loved is Al Trails I

have this like every other weekend I

would like to like go for a long hike

and there's always like the version of

Netflix that other people have where

it's like takes an hour to figure out

what to watch it takes me like two hours

to figure out what hike to do and the

all Trails thing to like say I want this

I want that you know I've already done

this one and like here's a great hike

it's been I it's sounds silly but I love

that one have you added any gpts of your

own have I made any yeah um I have not

put any in the store maybe I will great

um can you give us an update on the

volume or or the pace at which you're

seeing new gpts um the number I know is

that there had been 3 million created

before we launched the store I have been

in the middle of this trip around the

world that has been quite hectic and I

have not been doing my normal daily

metrics tracking so I don't know how

it's gone since launch but I'll tell you

by the slowness of chat GPT it's

probably doing really

well um I want to ask you about open

ai's copyright issues uh how important

are publisher relations to open ai's

business considering for example the

lawsuit last month file against open AI

by the New York Times They are important

but not for the reason people think um

there is this belief held by some people

that man you need all of my training

data and my training data is so valuable

and actually uh that is generally not

the case we do not want to train on the

New York Times data for example um and

all more generally we're getting to a

world where it's been like data data

data you just need more you need more

you need more you're going to run out of

that at some point anyway so a lot of

our research has been how can we learn

more from smaller amounts of very high

quality data and I think the world is

going to figure that out what we want to

do with Publishers if they want is when

one of our users says what happened to

Davos today be able to say here's an

article from blueberg here's an article

from New York Times and here you know

here's like a little snippet or probably

not a snippet there's probably some

cooler thing that we can do with the

technology and you know some people want

to partner with us some people don't

we've been striking a lot of great

Partnerships and we have a lot more

coming um and then you know some people

don't want want to uh we'd rather they

just say we don't want to do that rather

than Sue us but like we'll defend

ourselves that's fine too I just heard

you say you don't want to train on the

New York Times does that mean given the

the legal exposure you would have done

things differently as you trained your

model here's a tricky thing about that

um people the web is a big thing and

there are people who like copy from The

New York Times and put an article

without attribution up on some website

and you don't know that's a New York

Times article if the New York Times

wants to give us a database of all their

articles or someone else does and say

hey don't put anything out that's like a

match for this we can probably do a

pretty good job and um solve we don't

want to regurgitate someone else's

content um but the problem is not as

easy as it sounds in a vacuum I think we

can get that number down and down and

down have it be quite low and that seems

like a super reasonable thing to

evaluate us on you know if you have

copyrighted content whether or not it

got put into someone else's thing

without our knowledge and you're willing

to show us what it is and say don't

don't put this stuff as a direct

response we should be able to do that

um again it won't like thousand you know

monkeys thousand typewriters whatever it

is once in a while the model will just

generate something very close but on the

whole we should be able to do a great

job with this um so there's like there's

all the negatives of this people like ah

you know don't don't do this but the

positives are I think there's going to

be great new ways to consume and

monetize news and other published

content and for every one New York Times

situation we have we have many more

Super productive things about people

that are excited to to build the future

and not do their theatrics and and what

and what about DOI I mean there have

been artists who have been upset with

Dolly 2 Dolly 3 what what has that

taught you and how will you do things

differently we engage with the artist

Community a lot and uh you know we we

try to like do the requests so one is

don't don't generate in my style um even

if you're not training on my data super

reasonable so we you know Implement

things like that

um you know let me opt out of training

even if my images are all over the

Internet and you don't know what they

are what I'm and so there's a lot of

other things too what I'm really excited

to do and the technology isn't here yet

but get to a point where rather than the

artist say I don't want this thing for

these reasons be able to deliver

something where an artist can make a

great version of Dolly in their style

sell access to that if they want don't

if they don't want just use it for

themselves uh or get some sort of

economic benefit or otherwise when

someone does use their stuff um and it's

not just training on their images it

really is like you know it really is

about style uh and and that's that's the

thing that at least in the artist

conversations I've had that people are

super interested in so for now it's like

all right let's know what people don't

want make sure that we respect that um

of course you can't make everybody happy

but try to like make the community feel

like we're being a good partner um but

what what I what I think will be better

and more exciting is when we can do

things that artists are like that's

awesome Anna you are open AI ambassador

to Washington other capitals around the

world I I'm curious what you've taken

from your experience in Facebook what

you've taken from the tense relations

between a lot of tech companies and

governments and Regulators over the past

few decades and how you're putting that

to use now in open open AI I mean so I

think one thing that I really learned

working in government and of course I

worked in the White House during the

2016 Russia election interference and

people think that that was the first

time we'd ever heard of it but it was

something that we had actually been

working on for years and thinking you

know we know that this happens what do

we do about it and one thing I never did

during that period is go out and talk to

the companies because it's not actually

typical thing you do in government and

was much more rare back then especially

with you know these emerging tools and I

thought about that a lot as I entered

the tech space that I regretted that and

that I wanted governments to be able to

really understand the technology and how

the decisions are made by these

companies and also just honestly when I

first joined openi no one of course had

heard of openi in government for the

most part

and I thought every time I used it I

thought my God if IID had this for8

years I was in the administration I

could have gotten 10 times more done so

for me it was really how do I get my

colleagues to use it um especially with

open eyes mission to make sure these

tools benefit everyone I don't think

that'll ever happen unless governments

are incorporating it to serve citizens

more efficiently and faster and so this

is actually one of the things I've been

most excited about is to just really get

governments to use it for everyone's

benefit I mean I'm hearing like a lot of

sincerity in that pitch are Regulators

receptive to it it feels like a lot are

coming to the conversation probably with

a good deal of skepticism because of

past interactions with Silicon Valley I

think I mostly don't even really get to

talk about it because for the most part

people are interested in governance and

Regulation and I think that they know um

theoretically that there is a lot of

benefit the government many governments

are not quite ready to incorporate I

mean there are exceptions obviously

people who are really at the Forefront

so it's not you know I think often I

just don't even really get to that

conversation

so I want to ask you both about the

dramatic turn of events in uh November

Sam one day the window on these

questions will close um that is not you

think they

will I think at some point they probably

will but it hasn't happened yet so it

doesn't doesn't matter um I guess my

question is is you know have you

addressed the Govern the governance

issues the very unique uh corporate

structure at open AI with the nonprofit

board and the cap profit arm that led to

your ouer we're going to focus first on

putting a great full board in place um I

expect us to make a lot of progress on

that in the coming months uh and then

after that the new board uh will take a

look at the governance structure but I

think we debated both what does that

mean is it should open AI be a

traditional Silicon Valley for-profit

company we'll never be a traditional

company but the structure I I think we

should take a look at the structure

maybe the answer we have now is right

but I think we should be willing to

consider other things but I think this

is not the time for it and the focus on

the board first and then we'll go look

at it from all angles I mean presumably

you have investors including Microsoft

including uh your Venture Capital

supporters um your employees who uh over

the long term are seeking a return on

their investment um I think one of the

things that's difficult to express about

open aai is the degree to which our team

and the people around us investors

Microsoft whatever are committed to this

Mission um in the middle of that crazy

few days uh at one point I think like 97

something like that 98% of the company

signed uh a letter saying you know we're

all going to resign and go to something

else and that would have torched

everyone's equity and for a lot of our

employees like this is all or the great

majority of their wealth and people

being willing to go do that I think is

quite unusual our investors who also

were about to like watch their Stakes go

to zero which just like how can we

support you and whatever is best for for

the mission Microsoft too um I feel very

very fortunate about that uh of course

also would like to make all of our

shareholders a bunch of money but it was

very clear to me what people's

priorities were and uh that meant a lot

I I I sort of smiled because you came to

the Bloomberg Tech Conference in last

June and Emily Chang asked uh it was

something along along the lines of why

should we trust you and you very

candidly says you shouldn't and you said

the board should be able to fire me if

if they want and of course then they did

and you quite uh adeptly orchestrated

your return actually let me tell you

something um I the board did that I was

like I think this is wild super confused

super caught off guard but this is the

structure and I immediately just went to

go thinking about what I was going to do

next it was not until some board members

called me the next morning that I even

thought about really coming back um when

they asked you don't want you want to

come back uh you want to talk about that

but like the board did have all of the

Power there now you know what I'm not

going to say that next thing but I I I

think you should continue I think I no I

would I would also just say that I think

that there's a lot of narratives out

there it's like oh well this was

orchestrated by all these other forces

it's not accurate I mean it was the

employees of open AI that wanted this

and that thought that it was the right

thing for Sam to be back the you know

like yeah I thing I'll will say is uh I

think it's important that I have an

entity that like can fire this but that

entity has got to have some

accountability too and that is a clear

issue with what happened right Anna you

wrote a remarkable letter to employees

during The Saga and one of the many

reasons I was excited to to have you on

stage today was ju to just ask you what

were those five days like for you and

why did you step up and write that uh

Anna can clearly answer this if she

wants to but like is really what you

want to spend our time on like the soap

opera rather than like what AI is going

to do I mean I'm wrapping it up but but

um I mean go I think people are

interested okay well we can leave it

here if you want no no yeah let's let's

answer that question and we'll we'll we

can move on I would just say uh for

color that it happened the day before

the entire company was supposed to take

a week off so we were all on Friday uh

preparing to you know have a restful

week after an insane year so then you

know many of us slept on the floor of

the office for a week right there's a

question here that I think is a a really

good one we are at Davos climate change

is on the agenda um the question is does

do well I'm going to give it a different

spin considering the compute costs and

the the need for chips does the

development of AI and the path to AGI

threaten to take us in the opposite

direction on the climate

um we do need way more energy in the

world than I think we thought we needed

before my my whole model of the world is

that the two important currencies of the

future are compute SL intelligence and

energy um you know the ideas that we

want and the ability to make stuff

happen and uh the ability to like run

the compute and I think we still don't

appreciate the energy needs of this

technology um the good news to the

degree there's good news is there's no

way to get there without a breakthrough

we need Fusion or we need like radically

cheaper solar Plus Storage or something

at massive scale like a scale that no

one is really planning for um so

we it's totally fair to say that AI is

going to need a lot of energy but it

will force us I think to invest more in

the technologies that can deliver this

none of which are the ones that are

burning the carbon like that'll be those

all those unbelievable number of fuel

trucks and by the way you back one or

more nuclear yeah I I personally think

that

is either the most likely or the second

most likely approach feel like the world

is more receptive to that technology now

certainly historically not in the US um

I think the world is still

unfortunately pretty negative on fishing

super positive on Fusion it's a much

easier story um but I wish the world

would Embrace fishing much more I look I

I may be too optimistic about this but I

think

I I think we have paths now to

massive a massive energy transition away

from burning carbon it'll take a while

those cars are going to keep driving

there you know there's all the transport

stuff it'll be a while till there's like

a fusion reactor in every cargo ship um

but if if we can drop the cost of energy

as dramatically as I hope we can then

the math on carbon captur just so

changes uh I still expect unfortunately

the world is on a path where we're going

to have to do something dramatic with

climate look like geoengineering as a as

a as a Band-Aid as a stop Gap but I

think we do now see a path to the

long-term solution so I I want to just

go back to my question in terms of

moving in the opposite direction it

sounds like the answer is potentially

yes on the demand side unless we take

drastic action on the supply side but

there there is no I I see no way to

supply this with to to manage the supply

side without

a really big breakthrough right which is

this is does this frighten you guys

because um you know the world hasn't

been that versatile when it comes to

supply but AI as you know you have

pointed out is not going to take its

time until we start generating enough

power it motivates us to go invest more

in fusion and invest more in nor new

storage and and not only the technology

but what it's going to take to deliver

this at the scale that AI needs and that

the whole globe needs so I think it

would be not helpful for us to just sit

there and be nervous um we're just like

hey we see what's coming with very high

conviction it's coming how can we use

our

abilities uh our Capital our whatever

else to do this and in the process of

that hopefully deliver a solution for

the rest of the world not just AI

training workloads or inference

workloads Anna it felt like in 2023 we

had the beginning of a almost

hypothetical conversation about

regulating AI what what should we expect

in 2024 and you know does it do do do

governments act does it does it become

real and what is what is AI safety look

like so I think we it is becoming real

you know the EU is uh on the cusp of

actually finalizing this regulation

which is going to be quite extensive and

the Biden Administration uh wrote the

longest executive order I think in the

history of executive orders uh covering

this technology and is being implemented

in 2024 because they gave agencies you

know a bunch of homework for how to

implement this and govern this

technology and and it's happening so I

think it is really moving forward um but

what exactly safety looks like of what

it even is I think this is still a

conversation we haven't bottomed out on

you know we founded this Frontier Model

Forum in part yeah maybe explain what

that is so this is um for now this is um

Microsoft openai anthropic and um Google

but it will I think expand to other

Frontier Labs but really right now all

of us are working on safety we all red

teamr models um we all do a lot of this

work but we really don't have even a

common vocabulary um or a standardized

approach and to the extent that people

think like well this is just industry

but uh this is in part in response to

many governments that have asked us for

this very thing so like what is it

across industry that you think are

viable best practices is there a risk

that regulation starts to discourage

entrepreneurial activity in in AI I mean

I think people are terrified of this um

this is why I think Germany and France

and Italy in interjected into the EU um

AI act discussion because they are

really concerned about their own

domestic Industries being sort of

undercut before they've even had a

chance to develop were you satisfied

with your old boss's executive order and

was was there anything in there that uh

you had lobbied against no and in fact

you know I think it's it was really good

in that it wasn't just these are the

restrictions it's like and then also

please go and think about how your

agency will actually leverage this to do

your work better so I was really

encouraged that they actually did have a

balanced

approach um Sam first time at Davos

first time okay is um uh you mentioned

that uh You' prefer to spend more of our

time here on stage talking about AGI

what is the message you're bringing to

political leaders and other Business

Leaders here if you could distill it

thank you

um

so I think 2023 was a year where the

world woke up to the possibility of

these systems becoming increasingly

capable and increasingly General but GPT

4 I think is best understood as a

preview and it was more Over the Bar

than we expected of utility for more

people in more ways but you know it's

easy to point out the limitations and

again we're thrilled that people love it

and use it as much as they do but this

is progress here is not linear and this

is the thing that I think is really

tricky humans have horrible intuition

for exponentials at least speaking for

myself but it seems like a common part

of the human condition um what does it

mean if GPT 5 is as much better than gp4

is four was to three and six is to five

and what does it mean if we're just on

this trajectory now um what you know on

the question of Regulation I think it's

great that different countries are going

to try different things some countries

will probably ban AI some countries will

probably say no guard rails at all both

of those I think will turn out to be

suboptimal and we'll we'll get to see

different things work but as these

systems become more powerful um as they

as they become more deeply integrated

into the economy as they become

something we all used to do our work and

then as things beyond that happen as

they become capable of discovering new

scientific knowledge for

Humanity even as they become capable of

doing AI research at some point um the

world is going

to change more slowly and then more

quickly than than we might imagine but

the world is going to change um this is

you know a thing I I always say to

people is no one knows what happens next

and I really believe that and I think

keeping the humility about that is

really important you can see a few steps

in front of you but not too many

um but when cognition the when the cost

of cognition Falls by a factor of a

thousand or a million when the

capability of it becomes uh it augments

Us in ways we can't even imagine you

know uh like one example I I try to give

to people is what if everybody in the

world had a really competent company of

10,000 great virtual employees experts

in every area they never fought with

each other they didn't need to rest they

got really smart they got smarter at

this rapid Pace what would we be able to

create for each other what would that do

to the world that we experience and the

answer is none of us know of course and

none of us have strong intuitions for

that I can imagine it sort of but it's

not like a clear picture um and this is

going to happen uh it doesn't mean we

don't get to steer it it doesn't mean we

don't get to work really hard to make it

safe and to do it in a responsible way

but we are going to go to the Future and

I think the best way to get there in a

way that works

is the level of Engagement we now have

part of the reason a big part of the

reason we believe in iterative

deployment of our technology is that

people need time to gradually get used

to it to understand it we need time to

make mistakes while the stakes are low

governments need time to make some

policy mistakes and also technology and

Society have to co-evolve in a case like

this uh so technology is going to change

with each iteration but so is the way

Society works and that's got to be this

interactive iterative process um and we

need to embrace it but have caution

without fear and how long do we have for

this iterative process to play I I think

it's surprisingly continuous I don't

like if I try to think about

discontinuities I can sort of see one

when AI can do really good AI research

um and I can see a few others too but

that's like an evocative example um but

on the whole I don't think it's about

like Crossing this one line I think it's

about this continuous exponential curve

we climb together and so how long do we

have like no time at all in

infinite I saw GPT five trending on X

earlier this week and I clicked and I

you know couldn't I it sounded uh you

know probably misinformed but what what

can you tell us about gbt 5 and is it an

exponential uh you know improvement over

what we've seen look I don't know what

we're going to call our next model um I

don't know when are you going to get

creative with the uh the naming process

uh I don't want to be like shipping

iPhone

27 um so you know it's not my style

quite uh but I I think the next model we

release uh I expect it to be very

impressive to do new things that were

not possible with gp4 to do a lot of

things better and I expect us to like

take our time and make sure we can

launch something that we feel good about

and responsible about within open AI

some employees consider themselves to be

quote building God is that I haven't

heard that okay is um I mean I've heard

like people say that factiously but uh I

think almost all employees would say

they're building a tool more so than

they thought they were going to be which

they're thrilled about you know this

confusion in the industry of Are We

building a creature are we building a

tool um I think we're much more building

a tool and that's much

better uh to transition to something

yeah goad no no no no you finish your

thought oh I was just going to say like

the

the we think of ourselves as tool

Builders um AI is much more of a tool

than a product and much much more of a

tool than this like entity and uh one of

the most wonderful things about last

year was seeing just how much people

around the world could do with that tool

and they astonished us and I think we'll

just see more and more and human

creativity uh and ability to like do

more with better tools is remarkable and

and before we have to start wrapping up

you know there was a report that you

were working with Johnny I on an AI

powered device either within open AI

perhaps as a separate company you know I

bring it up because CES was earlier this

month and AI powered devices were the

the talk of of the conference you know

can you give us an update on that and

are we approach does AI bring us to the

beginning of the end of the smartphone

era smartphones are fantastic I don't

think smartphones are going anywhere uh

I think what they do they do really

really well and they're very general if

if there is a new thing to make uh I

don't think it replaces a smartphone in

the way that I don't think smartphones

replace computers but if there's a new

thing to make that helps us do more

better you know in a in a new way given

that we have this unbelievable change

like I don't think we quite I don't

spend enough time I think like marveling

at the fact that we can now talk to

computers and they understand us and do

stuff for us like it is a new affordance

a new way to use a computer and if we

can do something great there uh a new

kind of computer we should do that and

if it turns out that the smartphone's

really good and this is all software

then fine but I bet there is something

great to be done and um the partnership

with Johnny is that an open AI effort is

that another company I have not heard

anything official about a partnership

with

Johnny okay um Anna I'm going to give

you the last word as you and Sam meet

with business and world leaders here at

Davos what's the message you want to

leave them

with um I think the that there is an a

trend where people feel more fear than

excitement about this technology and I

understand that we have to work very

hard to make sure that the best version

of this technology is realized but I do

think that many people are engaging with

this via the leaders here and that they

really have a responsibility to make

sure that um they are sending a balanced

message so that um people can really

actually engage with it and realize the

benefit of this technology can I have 20

seconds absolutely one one of the things

that I think open ey has not always done

right in the field hasn't either is find

a way to build these tools in a way uh

and also talk about them that don't

don't get that kind of response I think

chat gbt one of the best things it did

is it shifted the conversation to the

positive not because we said trust us

it'll be great but because people used

it and are like oh I get this I use this

in a very natural way the smartphone was

cool cuz I didn't even have to use a

keyboard and phone I could use it more

naturally talking is even more natural

um speaking of Johnny Johnny is a genius

and one of the things that I think he

has done again and again about computers

is figuring out a way to make them very

human compatible and I think that's

super important with this technology

making this feel like uh you know not

this mystical thing from sci-fi not this

scary thing from sci-fi but this this

new way to use a computer that you love

and that really feels like I still

remember the first iMac I got and what

that felt like to me

relative it was heavy but the fact that

it had that handle even though it is

like a kid it was very heavy to carry um

it did mean that I was like I had a

different relationship with it because

of that handle and because of the way it

looked I was like oh I can move this

thing around I could unplug it and throw

it out the window if it tried to like

wake up and take over that's nice um and

I think the way we design our technology

and our products really does matter