🏅 Top traders

@firstuserhere Can the rest of these be resolved?

Figure wasn't mentioned, but they did talk about OAI's involvement with robots.

Seeing this was resolved Yes.

I realize that you said the bar would be low. Mindful of that, it seems this should still resolve No. Ilya was discussed but the topic “Ilya Sutskever’s current role (if any) at OpenAI” was not.

Sam mostly declined to answer the Ilya questions, and I don’t think the questions themselves would have to constitute the discussion. But neither the questions or answers touch on his status at OpenAI.

The relevant questions (from https://lexfridman.com/sam-altman-2-transcript/ ):

• “Let me ask you about Ilya. Is he being held hostage in a secret nuclear facility?”

• “What’s your relationship with him now?”

• “Do you have any idea why he’s been quiet? Is it he’s just doing some soul-searching?”

The closest Sam gets to the topic:

“I love Ilya. I have tremendous respect for Ilya. I don’t have anything I can say about his plans right now. That’s a question for him, but I really hope we work together for certainly the rest of my career. He’s a little bit younger than me. Maybe he works a little bit longer.”

@pdw Sama didn't answer the question (shocker, right?), but that topic was still discussed, lex brought it up and Sama gave a bs answer and lex goes further on it, asking for details, and sama dodges. that's discussion on that topic, with sama not answering it

@firstuserhere But Lex didn’t ask him the question either. None of his questions were about Ilya’s status at OpenAI or similar, eg, “does Ilya still work there?” or “is Ilya staying at/returning to OpenAI”. (I pasted the questions he asked in my comments.)

It’s relevant to compare to the Karpathy topic, which was entirely general; in contrast, the Ilya topic was much more specific. Given that, it seems the resolution should be against that specificity.

@pdw I was under the impression that lex did ask him, I'll watch that segment and report back

@firstuserhere Sounds good. Lex also posted a transcript here.

GPT 7 was discussed at 1:01:40 for at least 40 seconds (Lex says GPT 7 as an example reasoning about Fermat's last theorem, Sam says "a system like that" at least 30 seconds after indicating that topic was still what was being discussed)

@dogway good catch

@firstuserhere what do you think about some of this talk about fast/slow and safety etc?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvqFAi7vkBc&t=4525s

@shankypanky i will watch that in a bit

@firstuserhere no rush (also here maybe - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvqFAi7vkBc&t=5894s just depends on what you think of talking accelerationism)

@shankypanky don't think this had anything to do with accelerationism - clip 1

slow/fast takeoffs one day in the future are somewhat different from that

here Lex and Sam talk about being a non-profit and adding a for-profit arm (and he says "we won't set a precedent here" which means that's the current state)

this is a duplicate should NA?

does this need to be explicit or talk of Grok would count @firstuserhere

>. I will accept if the conversation about one of the options happens without mentioning the key phrase in the option

means talk of grok counts, but they also mention x explicitly multiple times i think

@jacksonpolack you're right - listening and betting and not reading (skill issue). they do talk of Grok but XAI as an entity hasn't come up yet.
thanks Jackson

i'll resolve in an hr or so, outside rn and manifold app is slow

@shankypanky

@shankypanky you are hella fast

Talking about gemini in general doesn't count unless they address the public outcry for at least 30s

@RanaG if you want Gemini in general then feel free to add it?

@shankypanky that's a good idea