OpenAI supremo Sam Altman says he 'doesn't know how' he would have taken care of his baby without the help of ChatGPT
Technology
77
Beiträge
62
Kommentatoren
26
Aufrufe
-
What a gimp
Hey, come on now! Don't be like that! That's totally uncalled for! Gimps are just living their best sexual fantasies within the context of safe and sensual consent. They've done nothing wrong!
-
Has Sam Altman never heard of parenting books?
books
I guess he just didn't like to buy a kindle.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Cute how he finds new ways every day to say: "I'm a loser."
-
This post did not contain any content.
It’s sad that all of our collective wisdom is so dead and gone people will turn to a glorified chatbot instead
-
I asked ChatGPT how Sam Altman would have taken care of his baby without the help of ChatGPT:
Sam Altman would’ve taken care of his baby the same way the rest of us did before his chatbot existed—by learning, asking, fumbling, caring, and figuring it out like a goddamn human.
Altman’s quote—“I don’t know how I would’ve done that”—feels less like a reflection on parenthood and more like an unintentional glimpse into the kind of disconnection that can happen when you believe your product is the answer to everything.
Of course, he’s not wrong that AI can be useful. But if your first thought when your newborn won’t sleep is to consult ChatGPT, that says more about your priorities than it does about parenthood.
the rest of us
feels [...] like
See even ChatGPT can emulate self-awareness better than Sam Altman.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Does he have a humiliation kink?
-
That says a lot about how worthless if a human he is.
if a human he is
Couldn't have said it better myself.
-
It’s sad that all of our collective wisdom is so dead and gone people will turn to a glorified chatbot instead
Please be a bit considerate. It's hard for him to form human connections when you are trying to be a plague on humanity.
-
This post did not contain any content.
We have mistaken rationality for a philosophy rather than a methodology, and efficiency for a virtue without any particular end in mind.
To have a unique, personal, subjective, divergent human experience is to sin against your prescribed algorithm.
-
This post did not contain any content.
For thousands of years people have raised their kids without the benefit of the moneypit 9000, Sam Altman is apparently dumber then a caveman.
-
This post did not contain any content.
What in the actual fuck ‽
-
This post did not contain any content.
Your kids will grow up and hate you because you suck as a dad.
-
Does he have a humiliation kink?
sammy knows what to say to get incurious venture capitalists to give him money
-
This post did not contain any content.
Maybe because he’s an idiot?
-
For thousands of years people have raised their kids without the benefit of the moneypit 9000, Sam Altman is apparently dumber then a caveman.
Millions.
-
He’s married.
I mean why are you surprised, he’s not a bad looking guy and is very successful.
Successful is debatable. There's no question he is financially successful, but he fails at every metric I personally measure success by: Honesty, integrity, loyalty, and kindness. I'm not saying my metric is the correct one by any means, just that the definnition of success varies across humanity.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I wonder how people have been doing it, since the beginning of time, with no help from technology.
Ya big fucking clown.
Edit:
Honestly bro what is it about tech bros being the biggest fucking losers on the face of this planet? I have more respect for street sweepers at this point
-
Successful is debatable. There's no question he is financially successful, but he fails at every metric I personally measure success by: Honesty, integrity, loyalty, and kindness. I'm not saying my metric is the correct one by any means, just that the definnition of success varies across humanity.
Anything is debatable. I could debate that the sky is not blue of if I wanted to. I’m debating you right now.
He is successful by the metrics in which society measures success and that’s all I meant by that.
-
Calling him successful is technically true, but it kind of glosses over some very pertinent details of his success. He's a billionaire, and you don't get to be a billionaire without doing a lot of monstrous things to good people.
The surprise isn't whether he's good looking enough to get a partner. The surprise is over the fact that there's another human being who thinks that those are qualities worth overlooking, especially one who's queer, since billionaires like Sam Altman support the current regime that's wholly against LGBTQ+ folks. And that same person with questionable tastes in partners wanted to take care of another human being with Sam Altman.
Saying someone’s is successful is not a moral judgement or approval of their character. Sam Altman is successful, Elon Musk is successful, all of these billionaires that built companies that have changed the world for better or wrong are all successful. This in no way means that I’m saying they’re good people or even that they are people that should be emulated or any other sort of moral judgement.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Poor little human . I mean the baby
