alt Hacker NewsOpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining
Comments
Lol, Sam Altman has had an ethics team this whole time?
Her typical day: "No Sam, you can't just publicly screw over everyone and get rid of all the jobs, the peasants care about that sort of thing and if they get angry enough we'll have real problems. No we can't just kill them all, why would you suggest that?"
Because it has to be a horrible job over there
lol, head of ethics at OpenAI? what a spurious role, I wish I could get in on the grift
Yet another event to add to https://www.openaifiles.org/
> The departure was first reported by the Financial Times [...] According to Business Insider, OpenAI has reorganised its safety, product and research teams numerous times [...] Chloé told IE Insights, a social media channel of the Spanish IE University, in March [...] A June article from The Economist highlights that [...]
Not a single link to any of those. That's just rude.
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
Oh no, if only the world had more ethicists on staff. If only Nazi Germany had someone with a thorough education in ethics on the payroll!
It's performative. She got paid more to shill for a different massive amoral mega-corporation. Don't be stupid.
A poli-sci major...who was an "ethicist" at Meta...
I'm having a hard time deciding what part of this is the most ridiculous. Contenders include:
- A political Science major lecturing on ethics.
- Meta and ethics in the same paragraph.
- A company who's CEO has credibly threatened (publicly) the livlihoods of hundreds of millions of people globally so much as paying lip service to ethics as a concept.
- Any news outlet feigning credulity hard enough to deadpan reporting on any of this.
Is it possible to roll one's eyes hard enough to injure oneself?
No ethics left at OpenAi huh? Lolol
AI labs are really good at disingenuousnessmaxxing
> 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.
Because knowledge about ethics, in a human, is 1% of what knowledge about ethics an LLM has. So unless this person is vibe coder, there is probably no reason to have her work there.
Strategically the best ethic czar one can hire for a company is the one that doesn't believe in this fluffy, arbitrary definition of ethics.
100% of the time, ethics department attracts activists, which is 100% trouble for the company in the future.
1786456998 | Why Did OpenAI's Head of Ethics Chlo Bakalar Leave? | https://aimagazine.com/news/why-did-openai-head-of-ethics-ch... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49258581
Yesterday I came up with an idea that I sent to some researchers at the different AI labs via email: Rather than train the model on one score, track two scores. The first score is the Short-term-objective-score (STOS) and the other, more important one, is the EAOS Ethically-aligned-outcome-score. Every trajectory can be evaluated on whether or not it has a high enough EAOS to be considered acceptable. If the model does some task and has a very high STOS but very low EAOS, like modifying game code to win at a game rather than playing by the rules, it is unacceptable. Models going forward must all have an ethics evaluation in tandem with objectives evaluation, and only when the ethics value is high enough should actions be considered successes.
I mean clearly she was doing a bad job. I’m shocked this was even a position there.