Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Instead of limiting models and debating ethics

This is what liability management looks like for proprietary models. If it's not out in the open, then you can be held directly accountable for generating the tokens that kill people. They're having these conversations to avoid being held liable, not because they're offended by people dying because of AI.

 help




No because USA is free to murder people, overthrow government. Citizens will cheer for their government, but they're scared about hypothetical scenarios where China win AI race.

[flagged]


Would you explain farther how China winning the AI race would result in world war 3 deaths?

Sure, China will build a lead in robotics, drones and weapon tech.

They will invade Taiwan, US defends, WW3.

If they don't have a military/tech lead, the status quo remains.


How does one "win the AI race?"

If there is a concrete finish line, there are likely no winners.


Mura Murati was CTO but not the AI lead. Her role was mostly organizational not scientific.

That's reaching speculation, and a hell of a hypothetical to base your entire argument on.

The "edge AI labs" are both begging for more regulation and a stronger federal presence in their development. Their desire is to be embedded in the killing machine where the monopoly on violence applies, and then abdicate themselves in civil suits when they're held accountable for ethical dilemmas. To get away with it, they have to limit the average Joe and upsell the government the full product.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: