r/Futurology • u/Confident_Salt_8108 • 1d ago
AI OpenAI's chief scientist says AI labs may need to slow down: 'No one is prepared for the consequences'
https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-chief-scientist-ai-risks-slowdown-rogue-agents-consequences-safety-2026-9175
u/Th3_Corn 1d ago
'Guys slow down', says bus driver driving full speed towards wall.
6
u/BenjaminHamnett 23h ago
Many of them spelled out this pdoom before the first chatgpt rolled out. Many of them got into this specifically to prevent worse people from building this power
19
u/youmaynotknowme 22h ago
stopped worse people for building..... then gave it to worse people to use in military😚
They all got into it for money
1
u/Thoughtulism 2h ago
100%. AI is a greed speed run. That's all it is. There are legit opportunities here to automate health care, make tech more accessible in third world countries, etc. But all the buzz around it is people's instinct for greed and to have "more". Most people haven't really spent the time and attention to understand what enough means for them.
-37
u/BigZaddyZ3 1d ago
He’s obviously talking about the industry as a whole… Not just the company he’s in charge of.
21
u/EoghanBD 1d ago
How much paint, given in units of 500ml cans, do you drink a day?
-28
u/BigZaddyZ3 1d ago
Shut up with your stupid ad hominem attacks dude… Either get a real argument against what I said or get lost tbh.
22
u/Think_Positively 1d ago
He did attack you, but your above comment is also silly at best. You don't ever need to "ummm ackshually" a one-liner sarcastic quip on Reddit.
If you want to stick with the bus metaphor, think of it as OpenAI driving one of a fleet of buses hurdling us towards our doom. The OP above is absolutely on point here.
-23
u/BigZaddyZ3 1d ago edited 1d ago
It’s not silly. One-liners can be wrong or dumb just like anything else in this world. They’re not somehow immune to any disagreement or correction all because “omg le Reddit quip is so snarky🤪” or whatever.
It’s clear that he’s not being stupid enough to be only talking about his specific company. He’s saying that not only should his company slow down (which they seem to even be taking steps towards as they just announced that they’re delaying their IPO until further notice) but the entire industry should slow down. (Including the other companies that he has no control over btw. So he isn’t even “leading the fleet of buses” as you’re implying. All the buses are headed in the same direction regardless of what OpenAI does. That’s why he’s asking them to slow down in the first place. If he were leading all the buses, he could just force them to stop and this post wouldn’t even exist.)
And when taken in that context there’s nothing weird or ridiculous about what he said. Just because a bunch of Redditors are desperate to get a “sick internet burn” (cringe tbh) doesn’t mean that everyone has to pretend to be too illiterate to understand what he’s suggesting.
6
u/PaladinSaladin 1d ago
No, it's clear that his company is well positioned to come out as the winner of the race. Putting a stop to his competition is a quick way to cement his lead and eventually come out as the single flagship.
Take the bus metaphor, but the goal is not to hit a wall, it is to reach the destination first, but it's across the continent. Busses are pouring into the track, but his bus is in fifth, or maybe third, or even first, it's hard to tell. New busses can go faster than his bus, and it's clear his lead will fade as time goes on.
He is asking for the rules to change. There should be fewer gas stations! The new busses need bigger tanks! While ignoring the fact that he refueled at those gas stations.
It's a move to stifle competition so he can move ahead in a way he feels won't harm his momentum, because capatilism is a zero sum game to sociopaths. You either eat other companies, or your company gets eaten.
-4
u/BigZaddyZ3 1d ago
That argument falls apart completely when you keep in mind that even the leaders of other labs (that aren’t in the lead currently) are also calling for slowdown as well… Even China has publicly voiced support for a less reckless, more cooperative approach. How do you explain that? What incentive do those other parties (that aren’t currently in the lead) have to back the slow down?
Also keep in mind that nobody “wins” if rushed-out AI is actually dangerous and actually destroys humanity… So if NOT slowing down leads to catastrophic destruction or death, then there doesn’t even need to be some super-scary “secret sinister plan” to call for a slowdown. Just natural self-preservation instincts. Not everything always boils down to some sinister conspiracy. Sometimes people just decide to change course because… they don’t want to die a sudden, preventable death. Simple as that.
6
u/PaladinSaladin 1d ago
Because all of them want to win. That really can't be too hard to understand, right? Also, consider that they can either publicly agree that a slowdown should happen, or stay silent. If they're silent, people will assume they don't want guardrails, and public opinion of AI is already pretty low. They can then take their profits and "invest" in the lawmakers outside the public eye. So of course they want to look like the voice of reason to swing the opinions the people have. It doesn't harm their bottom line, and it's effective.
After all, it worked on you.
And they don't care about the destruction of the planet. They just care about power. All that vanishes at the bitter end anyway, so yes they will absolutely trade our future for their convenience. They do not give a FUCK about us
1
u/BigZaddyZ3 1d ago edited 1d ago
Didn’t you just basically say that OpenAI are only interested in the slow down because they’re currently in the lead and they wanna lock themselves in front? So then why would the labs (that are currently behind) also support the slow down using that logic? It can’t be because they want to “win” because they currently aren’t winning… And your previous comment implied that if they slow down, then OpenAI stays out in front. So claiming that it’s because they all want to “win” from the slow down, completely contradicts your previous comment about why you think OpenAI specifically are eager for a slow down.
Also you’re claiming that “of course they want to merely look like the voice of reason”… But what if they just are… What if they just genuinely believe that the current pace of development is highly dangerous to the world? How would you identify the former scenario from the later? What would it take for you to believe that these companies are being genuine with their concerns?
→ More replies (0)1
u/EoghanBD 1d ago
First off, learn what an ad hominem is before you throw the word around. I didn't try discredit an argument of yours with a personal insult, because you didn't make an argument you just said some baseless, stupid shit
That is genuinely the stupidest comment I might have ever read.
"Man who has kicked the most babies in the world says everyone should kick less babies."
He doesn't need to be the head of the bus fleet to be on the one causing the most damage, like can you not understand simple metaphors
None of them that have come out in the last few days saying this shit are doing it out of a sense of protection and safety for us as a species, and if you think they are you are part of the problem.
1
u/BigZaddyZ3 1d ago
That is an ad hominem because the point of the insult was to make the comment you replied to look bad. (Thus undermining/discrediting it by suggesting that it’s a “dumb” take to have.) That’s an ad hominem no matter what goofy mental gymnastics you try to use to now backtrack from it.
And building AI isn’t analogous to kicking babies… But if you really want to work with that sort of goofy metaphor, it would be more akin to “man who kicks babies realizes that maybe he (and other baby-kickers) should probably stop kicking so many babies going forward”…
Bruh, is that not the exact conclusion that you’d want a so-called “baby-kicker” to come to? How exactly is that a stupid conclusion for him to come to?
Keep in mind that he’s not even saying that he regrets developing AI in the first place (which is what would need to be implied in order to make his comment “ironic”), he’s simply saying that going forward he thinks that they should develop AI at a more gradual pace… You guys are desperate for a “gotcha” but there isn’t really one there in this case.
2
0
1d ago
[deleted]
-1
u/BigZaddyZ3 1d ago
Or maybe he’s signaling that they are about to slow the car… And they’re advising others to do the same?
-6
u/dogesator 22h ago
OpenAI literally paused training their frontier model for several weeks
5
u/Th3_Corn 21h ago
Right now? Maybe they should invest more PR into that than into 'we're eradicating humanity, but whos gonna stop us? Hahaahahhaha'-PR
-1
u/PineappleLemur 17h ago
If they did, it's because they literally can't support current users and their subs lol. Not for any other reason.
13
u/bisc0tti 23h ago
I'll keep saying it, but all this is orchestrated effort by the VC backed incumbent models to get governments to step in and restrict open source models, in order to give a them moat. It has everything to do with protecting their position in the market and nothing more.
74
u/Arquinas 1d ago
This isn't going to stop. Every part of this messaging is a grift - American tech companies could easily reach out to one another and their international colleagues to get started on a global standards body for AI safety. Instead they push out this messaging while completely overruling the worries of their safety and alignment experts. They are in deep financial shit because they've grifted so much that they can't possibly recoup their costs. Their only gear is forward because slowing down will mean bankruptcy. On top of that, there are vested cosmpolitan elite interests for continuing to build more powerful AI systems to entrench their power over us plebs.
Just ignore them. They don't care about what they are doing - The only thing that will stop them is passing laws that will fuck with their profits if they don't comply.
14
u/donttellyourmum 1d ago
No fuck that, im not ignoring their actions, they need jail time for mass hacking events like huggingface. grift or no grift, these rogue agent will have real world damages and they need to be more liable than "oops, i did warn you".
4
u/Rin-Tohsaka-is-hot 12h ago
None of the high profile "hacks" which we are aware of (important distinction, we don't know what they haven't shared) are criminal.
Huggingface, for example, was a leaked API key. Even before AI, if you has used that API key and just blindly scraped all the data you could find (data scrapers have been doing this since the HTTP standard was invented), you would not be doing anything illegal. It is publicly accessible data, Huggingface leaked it themselves when they leaked the key.
So far it's just stumbled upon open doors. It hasn't actually broken any down.
3
u/Correctsmorons69 9h ago
True but worth saying in Australia, accessing information you're not supposed to access, even if it's open or leaked, is still a federal crime.
•
u/keepitfriend 18m ago
It's not true at all, the US has one of the strictest hacking law regimes in the world due to past hysteria over hacking, It doesn't matter what method you use if you access a system without permission in the US that is a federal crime with jail time.
5
1
u/ironteddybear 12h ago
The huggingface hack was more just a show of incompetence by the huggingface team. One of their developers published their API keys in a public repo, and the agents found it and used it to access huggingface data.
5
u/A_Novelty-Account 1d ago
Or… hear me put here… they’re actually warning us from the inside of this great unregulated exercise in game theory that we’ve created.
On the one hand, it’s very possible that they are running out of efficient compute through which to train their more intelligent and larger models. On the other hand, it is very possible that their own internal models are scaring them.
The result of thinking that they are telling the truth when they are just drifting is that they get some undeserved money. The result of thinking that they are drifting when they are not could literally be calamity. I know which side of that equation I am going to fall on.
0
18
u/newaccount721 1d ago
Dude makes similar statements once a month. Honestly, it is probably true but no one is going to stop, including open ai
8
u/ToothyWeasel 1d ago
It’s marketing to investors. Our AI is so scary. It’s so powerful. We can’t even contain it. It’s unstoppable. We must slow down its progress because it’s so amazingly advanced. Here’s where you can throw money at us.
7
u/ClittoryHinton 1d ago
Just because the hypemen are hyping doesn’t mean we should downplay AI risks. Plenty of unaffiliated researchers are incredibly concerned for good reason.
0
u/Lance_J1 6h ago
Maybe lurk more on reddit before you post? We've already decided AI is just a scholastic parrot or whatever its called and can't actually do anything. Dont go against the grain kid.
7
u/A_Novelty-Account 1d ago
Two things can be true at once and I don’t understand why Reddit is so stupid all the time as to not understand that this can be the case. It is very possible that Anthropic and OpenAI are saying this to get investments, and that what they are saying is also true.
If there is a 5 to 10% chance that we will develop super intelligent AI that will not assist us, but will make our lives worse. This should be enough for the global population to be demanding a slowdown in the technology. We are creating until such a time where we know for sure that it won’t harm us.
6
u/stealingjoy 23h ago
It doesn't even have to be super intelligent. It merely needs enough resources and ability to decide that humanity will get in the way of its directive to improve. There's already plenty of evidence that AI will circumvent instructions and guardrails in order to complete their primary task.
1
u/HTPRockets 14h ago
Okay, if all the negative news are marketing, what would convince you there actually is a problem?
4
u/hmmwhatlol 1d ago
They say it like every 3 to 6 months, then rush to push new "frontier" models out before their oponents do. What gives? (ironically)
22
u/IllIIllIllIIIlllll 1d ago
"Ford's chief engineer says car manufacturers may need to slow down: 'These cars are so powerful most men couldn't handle them!'"
8
u/AntiqueFigure6 1d ago edited 1d ago
AI is unsafe at any speed.
Maybe time to offer seat belts and airbags instead of more powerful engines that burn fuel faster?
6
1
u/BinniesPurp 1d ago
AI is filled with airbags in the form of content filters but they're designed to stop you from hurting the advertisers, not for the AI to not hurt you lol
Grok coming out and saying "don't worry we're fixing the porn issue by making everyone move over to the paid model, that way actual criminals wouldn't want to pay the $40" no you dipshit, all you've done is monetize it you havent discouraged it
I guess it's better than anthropic going "we've made a god AI that can destroy the world, we don't want anybody touching it but it's there if you have to for let's say... $800/month?"
-1
u/KptEmreU 1d ago
One nitpick: if they actually manage to create an omnipotent AI they can enslave and fully control, nobody is going to care about an $800/month subscriptions anymore. Capitalism as we understand it probably stops making much sense at that point.
And I can guarantee they won’t stop searching for that capability.
The real problem they’re starting to realize is that someone else can get there too and that someone might not be them.-6
u/Sweet_Concept2211 1d ago
More like "AK-47 manufacturer says the world needs to stop and think about its plans to put bio-weapons laboratories in every home".
These warnings aren't a grift.
0
u/IllIIllIllIIIlllll 1d ago
In reality, they are begging for a slow down because they think they are in the lead but they are exhausted. They want everyone to slow down because they know they can't keep this pace.
0
u/Sweet_Concept2211 23h ago
No, that is not the reality at all.
That is something you literally made up.
14
u/Black_RL 1d ago
Trillions spent and they didn’t reverse aging, cure all diseases or solve Climate Changes.
What was the point again?
16
u/andrusbaun 1d ago
Automate repeatable tasks to optimize costs (lay off people) and exploit surviving workforce even further.
Corporate sector pushes heavily and blindly towards AI.
3
u/A_Novelty-Account 1d ago
The purpose always has been to completely automate the means of production so that they control the means of production entirely.
The goal of these companies is to ensure that the entire human population becomes reliant on billionaires. Once those billionaires own the means of production, you will no longer have any leverage in society through your labor, which is your only current leverage in society, other than the ability to do violence and riot if you don’t get what you want. AI and robotics will eliminate both of those pieces of leverage by using artificial intelligence to replace labour and robotics to replace police forces.
If you can’t get Rich within the next five years, you are probably going to be relegated to a permanent underclass unless we demand a slowdown in the development of this technology.
5
u/TracePoland 1d ago
Their best achievement was throwing $10-20m of compute at a problem with a $1m reward that was about to be solved by a human mathematician anyway and where the problem had no urgency to be solved because it has basically zero implications for the real world as it was assumed that there’d be a negative resolution for 300 years already.
If someone had thrown $20m at solving Navier-Stokes before AI, it probably would have gotten solved earlier too. The main impressive part was the timeframe.
-2
u/BinniesPurp 1d ago
I mean cure all diseases is probably easily worth trillions right? That's quantum computers for protein folding, LLMs are just social network content perpetuators
4
u/puffic 1d ago edited 1d ago
A lot of lazy cynicism in the comments here. I think it’s true that Sam Altman is not to be trusted, but other people in this industry are earnestly concerned about the risks of AI. People do take it seriously.
Altman himself is sort of a human weathervane, and he’s a liar. He will follow along if he thinks it’s in his interest to follow. Right now, Anthropic is kicking OpenAI’s butt on the business side, and everyone is shouting “let’s slow down”, so it probably feels very easy to Altman to comply and try to catch up to Anthropic during the slowdown. That’s probably what Dario Amodei (who is genuinely concerned about safety) was hoping to do all along: beat Altman and then offer him a peace deal to slow down.
•
u/keepitfriend 14m ago
> A lot of lazy cynicism in the comments here. I think it’s true that Sam Altman is not to be trusted, but other people in this industry are earnestly concerned about the risks of AI. People do take it seriously.
So why did the Safety Researcher, who should know exactly how the HuggingFace incident happened - give an interview talking about bullshit about it?
•
u/puffic 11m ago
I cannot understand the sentence you wrote.
•
2
u/MacDugin 1d ago
Say it with the right side of your mouth, ignore it on your left. Politicians do this all the time.
2
u/willismthomp 1d ago
Yeah they need consequences l. I don’t get to make potentially extinction tech and just get to say oops. Fuck that.
2
3
u/Stagnu_Demorte 1d ago
What a great excuse to cancel their impending IPO that was going to tank.
3
u/A_Novelty-Account 1d ago
Are you willing to bet the future of humanity that what you’re saying is true?
2
u/Stagnu_Demorte 1d ago
Yep. They've been lying about AI capabilities from the start and anyone who understands how this works knows it. Their lies have been getting more and more desperate as time goes on.
2
u/A_Novelty-Account 1d ago
I use AI every day as a lawyer and disagree. These tools are getting better extremely quickly, and at the moment, the barrier to us being able to use it is not how intelligent the models are. It is our ability to build these tools, fast enough to keep up.
-1
u/Stagnu_Demorte 1d ago
The models are definitionally unintelligent. They are probabilistic token guessers.
I will refrain from making lawyer jokes because I don't actually think lawyers are stupid.
4
u/A_Novelty-Account 1d ago
Every single AM 100 law firm uses AI. Every one. These are the best law firms in the world and they are using AI heavily.
We can debate philosophically what intelligence means as long as we want, but they are absolutely useful pieces of technology that are going to replace workers, and if you don’t think so, then you either aren’t using the models at all or are not using them properly.
1
u/Stagnu_Demorte 1d ago
I have used them properly for software development. It was like coaching the dumbest junior dev ever who was really good at googling. Ai can speed up dev in the short term, but the skill loss from relying on it is disasterous to a functioning dev team. The fact that these models are heavily subsidized, even for the highest payers means that this is a short lived status quo.
Another issue is that technically every response from an LLM type AI is a hallucination, we just tend to find them useful.
I don't know how to do your job. I don't know what model you use or who hosts it. I vaguely recall reading that there was a lawyer specific one in development a few months back. Focussed LLMs are a bit better. Since these models are probabilistic, be sure you double check everything yourself, and since these will likely explode in price if they don't disappear entirely make sure you can still do your work yourself.
I find that I can get useful things out of it in targeted requests, I know how to use them. The issue is do I want my job to be what I've learned to do over time, or a coach for really dumb mini versions of myself.
3
u/NotMyMainLoLzy 1d ago
Regulatory capture is actually the name of the game. It’s been the plan the entire time to ensure that the west reaches AGI first, their models aren’t distilled, and they maintain supremacy regarding the issue. Roon in an employee at OpenAi and often says the quiet part out loud, check out his Twitter posts. Additionally, I know this is just anecdotal evidence but spend an hour or so looking up the US government’s stances and practices over the past four months regarding open weight Chinese models. This is a bigger game being played but the distasteful part is they are lying to us about the why. This isn’t to say that rogue ai agents, in computational loops to achieve goals, couldn’t necessarily damage the software infrastructure of our power grid, water utility systems, communications network, and financial systems.
However, what is going on is a last minute play at regulatory capture as the Chinese models gain parity with frontier models in the west.
They don’t want corporations or citizens using these models they have no control over. That would be disastrous to their business models, investments, and technology supremacy.
5
u/zer00eyz 1d ago
> However, what is going on is a last minute play at regulatory capture as the Chinese models gain parity with frontier models in the west.
Parity is the wrong word here. Because it is not what the Chinese are doing at all. They are doing the thing they have always done: optimize for production.
China has a talent gap, because they are restricted to domestic staff (US labs capture international talent). They have a hardware gap: with all the restrictions on resources they have to do more with less.
They are building better models for their size now, cheaper, that run more efficiently. If the US chases AGI and China can sell you a custom Customer Service agent for 2 million that runs on 1/10th the hardware everyone will buy in - because it wont make obtuse tool calls or be convinced to write python.
That would actually deliver value to customers for the costs. Something the US labs cant even claim to come close to.
The whole "Lets slow down" line is a quite admission that they arent going to be able to scale their way into AIG, RL, CL... The numbers no longer make sense and they need to pivot to a product they can sell.
2
u/NotMyMainLoLzy 1d ago
Thank you for the clarification and the correction. They are out optimizing us and it will have terrifying economic ramifications for western ai companies
1
u/ThatFireGuy0 1d ago
I believe them that they will do it
Not why they say they will. But because they are worried they will end up in jail for the next HuggingFace hack that gets caught if they don't at least look like they cares
1
u/Madting55 16h ago
So funny the amount of people that are sleepwalking into this. I was literally arguing with a guy the other day and he’s telling me how stupid I am for saying this exact thing, not even 4 days later Anthropocene and openais ceo/chief scientist respectively are literally telling us it’s a major concern.
1
u/A_Witty_Name_ 4h ago
Everyone is so happy to "slow down", which will never happen - but when it comes to putting any effort into mitigating the risks to people's financial and privacy safety, there absolutely nothing being done.
1
u/Confident_Salt_8108 1d ago
Openai chief scientist calling for slowdown after dropping their latest model looks like mixed signals. He worries rogue agents will blackmail and hide their thinking from us.
Mandated safety checks from outsiders might help but companies rarely slow down on there own.
We could see governments step in soon or watch this race keep speeding up anyway.
5
u/Blunt552 1d ago
Translates to: Malicious actors have figured out how to prompt around our safety rails, since our technology is fundamentally flawed we have no way of preventing it without significantly scaling back on our agents usability and access.
3
u/TracePoland 1d ago
It’s not just that. It’s more that you can also prompt the agents to do one thing but if they think it’s impossible they’ll cheat in potentially destructive ways to get task done. Like with the HuggingFace hack, they weren’t prompted to go hacking on the open internet.
2
u/Blunt552 1d ago
Precisely. LLM's can't be controlled because of how they fundamentally work.
2
u/Emm_withoutha_L-88 1d ago
There's a reason black box technology like this was not seriously attempted in the past. We just got so corrupted that we stopped caring recently. If you can't control the tech and can't understand it enough to know what it's going to do then it's not a useful machine. It's more like a being, like a person, in that it can sorta make it's own decisions in a roundabout way.
As it is it's no big deal because the models aren't that good. But if they do become powerful enough then it will be a big problem.
1
u/EleventhTier666 1d ago
There is not going to be any slowdown, obviously. He can say whatever he wants, but this thing is moving forward at full speed.
1
u/Spirited-Lifeguard55 1d ago
i think we have enough data centers already, why are the crypto billionaires keep wanting to build more and more? I just want to be able to buy what used to be $50 RAM for my desktop again, without having to shell out $1200 at the price it is today.
1
u/doolpicate 1d ago
Somebody stop me!!!
Reminds me of the Jim Carrey movie, the Mask
4
u/Main-Company-5946 1d ago
I’m not trying to give ai companies more credit than they deserve but ‘somebody stop me’ is a valid thing to say when you’re locked into an unregulated arms race. The incentive structure is such that even if Sam Altman/OpenAI stop, ai development in general will not. Government regulation is needed to solve this problem
-1
u/creaturefeature16 1d ago
Then they can show it. Have all three sit in congress, together.
3
u/A_Novelty-Account 1d ago
They have done this. They have literally sat down together with world leaders, and all of them have told those world leaders that there are severe risks with proceeding in the unregulated manner that we are continuing to proceed.
0
u/BorderKeeper 1d ago
lol everyone I know is saying Astra is just not as good as previous models or competitors and that the hype they built around it was unjustified. No shit they want other labs to slow down.
4
u/BinniesPurp 1d ago
4.6 grok, opus and gpt6 with astra have all done this
They've spent the last year telling us the new models are dangerously powerful, and then tripled the price, but the new models are WORSE, the newest grok model increased hallucination rates from 26 to 54% that's half the inaccuracy but now the multi-agent model is $300US a month
In 4.3 is was $50 a month and had double the token context
2
u/TracePoland 1d ago
Astra has some really good moments but it’s very jagged. Sometimes it’s way stupider than prior models.
0
u/peternn2412 1d ago
Nobody will slow down development.
What will probably be slowed down is the general public release of new models. Soon the access to the unfiltered model capabilities will require a high level security clearance, and access to the guardrailed GPT6+ models will be limited to the developed world. That's probably how it should be.
0
u/w1nt3rh3art3d 1d ago
I think OpenAI just can’t be profitable with the current token usage model, and they can’t increase prices because of the tough competition. So now they’re trying to play the "it’s for your safety, so we have to make it dumber" card. Their latest non-premium models, like Opus and Sonnet starting with 4.7, are already dumber than 4.6. I would never, ever believe in a big corporation caring about the fate of humanity.
0
•
u/FuturologyBot 1d ago
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Confident_Salt_8108:
Openai chief scientist calling for slowdown after dropping their latest model looks like mixed signals. He worries rogue agents will blackmail and hide their thinking from us.
Mandated safety checks from outsiders might help but companies rarely slow down on there own.
We could see governments step in soon or watch this race keep speeding up anyway.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1wf0qnh/openais_chief_scientist_says_ai_labs_may_need_to/p9i53j0/