411
Accept ‘bad things’ in return for benefits of AI, says Sam Altman
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2026
411 points (98.1% liked)
News
39477 readers
2699 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
The original comment stated "alleged SA", note the careful language stating the allegation that this case is all about, not a wild accusation that the man is a paedophille or a rapist. Wild allegations are your thing buddy.
I'm not even sure what this sentence is trying to say, is English your first language? If you are asking me to stop making you look a fool and a hypocrite by using your own words against you, why should I?
The fact that you even had to ask this makes me wonder if you dressed yourself this morning or needed the assistance of a carer.
Exactly. This means that they're likely talking about the case, the allegations/accusations. I then commented ON THAT CASE that it looks weak. Anyone who then starts getting personal (you were the first to insult me, which prompted my "listen here you little shit" comment) instead of staying objective implies you truly believe the accusations before trial has happened. That sounds like you. I was also quite clear on my position (that I want altman to lose), but I'm not going to start lying to myself. If new evidence is going to get presented, then obviously it would change how strong the case looks. Are you starting to understand? Please never work as a lawyer.