Either OpenAI, the goverment, or a credible media source must make a statement claiming they have identified a specific employee as a spy. The employee's identity does not need to be made public, but it must be known to individuals in OpenAI or the goverment.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ488 | |
| 2 | Ṁ200 | |
| 3 | Ṁ171 | |
| 4 | Ṁ94 | |
| 5 | Ṁ85 |
People are also trading
@Ernie how is it actually working for openai? do they have a culture where they share almost everything with everyone or more like apple?
@Soli I have no idea! But it would be nice to know. If only Ilya would leave EU & US jurisdiction and spill the beans
Looks like it's happened for Google's AI division: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68497508
This must happen all the time at Google etc but finding out is extremely rare since nobody has an incentive to talk about it. Maybe because of the spotlight on ai it will be higher profile? But since it'd be a Chinese guy the normal script that it's racially justified will be run regardless of reality
@Dreamingpast Anyone in an employee-like relationship will count, including most of your examples. (What wouldn't count? Random subcontractors who don't directly interact with OpenAI employees. It's a bit of a fuzzy line, but I intend to resolve according to the spirit of "employee" rather than any specific legal definition.)