ak830

lmao i completely agree

CISO is a fair pushback. But I would challenge you on "firing an ethicist is like firing a marketing person". This HF issue clearly brings to light possible ethical issues with how these models are being trained ...

What do you mean? She didn't job hop to a better job, that's the whole point. She very well could have gotten "let go".

Furthermore, this theory is not mutually exclusive with the incident being a publicity stunt to signal model strength to existing and prospective investors (especially in light of all attention being given to Anthropic Claude Mythos). It could STILL have been a publicity stunt unbeknownst to Chloe (Chief Ethicist), positioned to the public as a serious security breach, and she took the fall.

I'm super confused as to why no one is theorizing the obvious...? Given none of us know the inner workings of why she left, why not resort to the most simple and straightforward conclusion: she left because OpenAI needed a scapegoat to blame the HuggingFace incident on. Given she is the chief "ethicist", even if not directly her fault, the HF incident could be directly blamed on her by not steering the implementation of enough safeguards to prevent this from happening. Therefore, she was let go. Why is this not being theorized by anyone on this thread so far?

Someone challenge me.