Geoffrey Irving (Research Director, AI Safety Institute)
Given the tweet thread Geoffrey wrote during the board drama, it seems pretty clear that he’s willing to publicly disparage OpenAI.
(I used to work with Geoffrey, but have no private info here)
I agree, but I think it still matters whether or not he’s bound by the actual agreement. One might imagine that he’s carefully pushing the edge of what he thinks he can get away with saying, for example, in which case he may still not be fully free to speak his mind. And since I would much prefer to live in a world where he is, I’m wary of prematurely concluding otherwise without clear evidence.
Given the tweet thread Geoffrey wrote during the board drama, it seems pretty clear that he’s willing to publicly disparage OpenAI. (I used to work with Geoffrey, but have no private info here)
I agree, but I think it still matters whether or not he’s bound by the actual agreement. One might imagine that he’s carefully pushing the edge of what he thinks he can get away with saying, for example, in which case he may still not be fully free to speak his mind. And since I would much prefer to live in a world where he is, I’m wary of prematurely concluding otherwise without clear evidence.
Fair point
I endorse Neel’s argument.
(Also see more explicit comment above, apologies for trying to be cute. I do think I have already presented extensive evidence here.)