I weakly disagree. The fewer safety-motivated people want to work at OpenAI, the stronger the case for any given safety person to work there.
Also, now that there are enough public scandals, hopefully anybody wanting to work at OpenAI will be sufficiently guarded and going in with their eyes fully open, rather than naive/oblivious.
Counter-counter-argument: the safety-motivated people, especially if entering at the low level, have ~zero ability to change anything for the better internally, while they could usefully contribute elsewhere, and the presence of token safety-motivated people at OpenAI improves OpenAI’s ability to safety-wash its efforts (by pointing at them and going “look how much resources we’re giving them!”, like was attempted with Superalignment).
I weakly disagree. The fewer safety-motivated people want to work at OpenAI, the stronger the case for any given safety person to work there.
Also, now that there are enough public scandals, hopefully anybody wanting to work at OpenAI will be sufficiently guarded and going in with their eyes fully open, rather than naive/oblivious.
Counter-counter-argument: the safety-motivated people, especially if entering at the low level, have ~zero ability to change anything for the better internally, while they could usefully contribute elsewhere, and the presence of token safety-motivated people at OpenAI improves OpenAI’s ability to safety-wash its efforts (by pointing at them and going “look how much resources we’re giving them!”, like was attempted with Superalignment).