Re:Thom's account on an exchange with OpenAI regarding non-s...
by wiei on Thursday September 10, 2026 @08:28PM
(#49651991)
Was it?
They've been dishing out cheap access specifically to researchers give over lmao. The researcher's got lured in - they need to accept they got played TBH.
Altman is certainly more devious than Amodei - he's shown that time and time again.
PG was right about he said about him.
Every entity on earth should see it as a kill shot: be careful what you put in the models. None of your information is safe.
Re:Thom's account on an exchange with OpenAI regarding non-s...
by byzantinegene on Friday September 11, 2026 @12:17AM
(#49653495)
i'm not sure why there's a need for comparison here. both are not saints and you shouldn't trust any of them anyway
Re:Thom's account on an exchange with OpenAI regarding non-s...
by gw32 on Thursday September 10, 2026 @11:12PM
(#49653124)
Altman miscalculated badly. OpenAI took what could have been amazing publicity, and in a rush to publish, gave reason for users to distrust their core product.
It's like they're allergic to slowing down.
The part that makes them horrible that can’t be charged off as an accident is the insistence that an academic scrub someone off a math paper because he worked at Anthropic.