Sam Altman Says "Vist Me In Jail"... Insane OpenAI Damage Control AMA...

The cracks are starting to show with

OpenAI and Sam Alman. This is bonkers.

Now, if you believe these numbers, Chat

GPT has suffered over 700,000

people unsubscribing from their paid

services. Now, this is resulting in

Anthropic getting a ton of positive

press simply because they are the ones

that are well not willing to just do

mass surveillance on the US citizens and

also allow fully autonomous systems with

their AI in terms of military weapon

systems, which of course Open AI seems

to have no problem with. I've covered

this in a previous video, so I'm not

going to go over that in detail in this

one. But what I am going to say is this.

Sam Alman is [ __ ] the bed. And uh

it's quite evident by what he's doing

now. Look at this. It is it is crazy.

This is Robert Bay by uh product manager

at Anthropic and look at the top

downloads on the app store. Claude is

number one. Chat GPT has been knocked

off that spot by obviously their

behavior over the last couple of days uh

when it comes to their um duplicitus,

let's say, uh CEO and all of that.

Basically a mask off moment uh for the

company. And also Dick Sporting's goods.

So I looked into this. Basically, the

reason why that's there is they've got

an offer where I think if you do

activities and track them with their

app, you get discount codes to use in

their store. So, that's why they're

number three. Um, but the big story here

is Claude for the first time ever has

knocked Chat GPT off the top rank spot.

So, why? That's the question. Well, we

know why. It is because Anthropic stood

up for their values and said, "Hey, we

don't feel very comfortable using our AI

systems for fully autonomous weapons and

we don't like the idea of using it for

mass surveillance." That same day, Sam

Orman says, "Oh, yeah, I agree with

Anthropic. That's great." And then that

very evening, he then decides, "No,

actually, we'll just take over the

Anthropic contract." As obviously,

Anthropic was deemed a supply chain risk

by the US government and removed from US

systems. although uh it's going to take

6 months to remove them and there was a

deadline if you remember the Friday

deadline. Now, what's interesting about

that, and we'll get on to it in this

video, is obviously what happened after

Friday, um, was a, well, the USIsraeli

strikes on Iran, which, as I'm going to

show you, used Claude, they used their

AI. So, they wanted the AI systems to be

in place to use them for that um,

mission planning and all that kind of

stuff that they were doing. Not using

them for autonomous weapons, not yet,

but using them at a mission intelligence

level. So, this prompts Sam Alman to do

this. Now, this was uh yesterday or

well, it's today if you're watching this

video today, but it was early hours of

the morning for me. You can see it was

12:13 a.m. Um, in some ways, it's

bonkers. We live in a world where the

CEO of, you know, the biggest private

company there is. Maybe you could say

Starling could be the biggest private

company in terms of value, but it's not

really. Let's just roll with Open Hour.

It's one of the biggest companies,

right? um reportedly worth near 800

billion at current valuations. Their CEO

is just goes on to Twitter and starts

talking like this. He's worried, right?

He's absolutely worried. He is losing

market share to Anthropic. They are

losing market share to Google. They're

losing market share all over the place

and everything they seem to do. When I

say market share, I mean consumer market

share. Clearly, they're not losing like

government market share. uh and they're

trying to go into uh the corporate arena

as well to take an anthropic. But look

at this. He says, "I'd like to answer

questions about our work with the

Department of War." You know, I cannot

stop reading that as Dawn of War cuz

it's Dawn of War, is it? Dawn of War.

Dawn of War, by the way, the remaster of

Dawn of War is really good. And Dawn of

War 4 looks sick. I need that. Uh

anyway, Dawn of War 2 is a good game as

well. Dawn of War 3 was trash, but four

looks pretty good. Anyway, he says, um,

"Ask me anything." So it's like, okay,

let's let's take a look at what he says.

So we'll look at the question and we'll

look at the answer. If the government

comes back with a memo saying that in

their view mass domestic surveillance is

legal, do you accept that? Do you do it

until the courts bar it or do you delay

until the courts approve it? Second,

would mass domestic surveillance been

lawful use right now? That's a good

question. And he says we would not do

that because it violates the

constitution. Also, I cannot overstate

how much the department of war has been

extremely aligned on this point. This is

objectively not accurate because this is

what Anthropic was saying and they threw

Anthropic out for saying the same thing.

So this just cannot be accurate.

However, maybe this is the question you

are really asking. What would we do if

there were a constitutional amendment

that made it legal? Maybe I would quit

my job. I mean, I can't I can't see that

happening in in any world. I very

deeply, although a lot of people

probably would like to see it, but

anyway, I very deeply believe in the

democratic process and that our elected

leaders have the power and that we all

have to uphold the constitution, but

isn't he agreeing to have his systems

used in mass surveillance, which is

against that? See, this is this is what

this guy is all over the place. I'm

terrified of a world where AI companies

act like they have more power than the

government. I don't like So, here's the

thing. I'm I'm not entirely sure he is.

think he wants to be the person with

more power. See, you've got to remember

what has happened here. There was a gap.

Anthropic has been removed from

government systems. Immediately the same

day, this guy is he enters. He goes

straight in. It doesn't matter what the

ethical impact of that might be, what

the constitutional impact of that might

be, what the legal, he just doesn't

care. He's like, "Whatever, get us in."

It's ruthless behavior of someone that

wants relentless growth, which is

typically what these CEOs generally do.

Anyway, I would also be terrified of a

world where our government decides mass

domestic surveillance was okay. I don't

know how I'd come to work every day if

that were the state of the country or

the constitution. But he is building

tools that directly enable this. That's

what's bonkers. How long has this

conversation with the department of war

been going for? What was the reason for

announcing so close to the deadline they

gave anthropic? Again, good question.

Interesting that he answered this. For a

long time, we were planning uh to

non-classified work only. We thought the

D

clearly needed an AI partner and doing

classified work is clearly much more

complex. We have said no to previous

deals in classified settings that

anthropic took. We started talking with

the Department of War many months ago

about our non-classified work. This week

things shifted into a high gear on the

classified side. We found the D. It it

doesn't sound very good to say as a DO,

but I'm going to keep say I keep saying

like that instead of department of war

to be flexible on what we needed and we

wanted to support them in their very

important mission. The reason for

rushing is an attempt to deescalate the

situation. I think the current path

things are on. The reason for rushing is

an attempt to deescalate the situation.

It isn't. It's just an attempt to

capture market. That's all it is. It's

crazy. I mean, if this guy had any

bollocks, he would just be like, I I

stand with the comments of Anthropic.

Now, I'm not saying like be be fully

aware. I am not saying anthropic are

like great, right? They've been used,

like I said, they've been using the

strikes on Iran and they've been inside

the military for a while. So, these

systems are being used whether you like

it or not, for nefarious means, right?

So, for him to come out, Dario, and say,

"Look, we've got a line and they want us

to cross it and we're not going to do

it." And the very same day Open is like,

"Yeah, we'll cross that line." That's

[ __ ] Like if this guy Sam Alman had

come out and said no, I believe in what

Anthropica is saying then that would

leave the door open to like what I'm

sure XAI would do it but who gives a

[ __ ] about them. You know what I mean?

So this is like a complete loss of

values. And again this is why they're

suffering with people pulling back and

stopping using their service because

it's showing that they are untrustworthy

in a massive massive like a really

dangerous way. Anyway, I think the

current path things are on is dangerous

philanthropic

healthy competition and the US. We

negotiated to make sure similar terms

would be offered to all other AI labs. I

know what it's like to feel backed into

a corner and I think it's worth some

empathy to the DOW.

They are on the very they are a very

dedicated group of people as I mentioned

an extremely important mission. I cannot

imagine doing their work. Our industry

tells them the technology we're building

is going to be the high order bit bit in

geopolitical conflict. China is rushing

ahead. You are very behind and then we

say but we won't help you and we think

you are kind of evil.

I don't think I'd react great in that

situation. I do not believe unelected

leaders of private companies should have

as much power as our de democratically

elected government. But I do think we

need to help them. The main competitor,

Anthropic, did OpenAI come out and say

they do not think Anthropic should be

labeled a supply chain risk. It was even

stated that your position on this was

made clear to the DO. From the outside,

it feels like some political chess given

this was said after your deal was

confirmed with the D. And then he says

enforcing the um STR, so the supply

chain uh designation on anthropic would

be very bad for our industry and our

country and obviously their company. I

mean, but it's it's it's being forced on

them. I don't think the legal uh

documents have been submitted to them,

but it is the process is beginning. We

said to the DOW before and after what

what's we said that part of the reason

we are willing to do this quickly was in

the hopes of deescalation.

I mean, it's it just isn't though. It's

just to get in it isn't it just isn't. I

feel competitive with anthropic for

sure. But successfully building safe

super intelligence and widely sharing

the benefits is way more important that

any company than any company

competition. I believe they would do

something to try to help us in the face

of great injustice if we could.

We should all care very much about the

president.

I saw in some other tweet that I must

not be willing to criticize the DO. It

said something about sucking their dick

too hard to be able to say anything

critical, but I assume this was the

intent to say it very clearly. I think

this is a very bad decision from the DO

and I hope they reverse it. If we take

heat for strongly criticizing it, then

so be it. Now, this one is like hang it

in the Louve. It is store this message

and get ready and then hang it in the

Lou when it proves to be the case. So,

he says, well, he gets asked what will

be the case or the cause. Open AI what

would cause sorry open AI to walk away

from a government partnership nothing

they're never going to walk away from

one right anyway is there a clearly

defined boundary or red line you won't

cross and he says well let me just

address that why I say that the reason

why they will never walk away from this

because the way these AI systems work

and look at what's going on with Claude

at the moment it is embedded in the

government systems it's very hard to get

that out and replace it with a different

model the longer you are in these

systems the more difficult it becomes to

remove you so even if models get better

and maybe can do slightly different.

It's going to be hard to remove the

embedded model. So it is in the interest

of an AI lab to get embedded and you can

say this is what anthropic were doing.

They did this but then when the crunch

came and suddenly you know they were

asked we're just going to remove the

guardrails and they're like no they

stood up for it then they got removed.

Now, Open AI clearly want to be in the

government systems because the longer

they're in them, the harder it is to get

rid of them. And you know, think 10

years down the line, they will be the

deacto provider of the AI services to

whatever the government are using them

for and not just the US government,

right? This will um like precipitate out

across all major western governments as

well. Um unless there's a political

backlash, which there may be, especially

in European governments. Um but then he

says this, and this is what I'm saying,

hang this up and get ready. If we were

asked to do something unconstitutional

or illegal, we will walk away. Please

come visit me in jail if necessary.

Which of Open AI's core principles was

the most difficult to reconcile with the

DO's requirement during your internal

debates this week? Thinking through

non-domemestic surveillance, I have

accepted that the US military is going

to do some amount of surveillance on

foreigners, and I know foreign

governments try to do it to us, but I

still don't like it. I think it is very

important that society thinks through

the consequences of this. Perhaps the

single principle I care most about for

AI is that it is democratized and I can

see surveillance making that worse. On

the other hand, I also respect the

democratic process. I don't think this

is up to me to decide. You see, it's not

up to him to decide, but he is the

leader of the company that's willing to

provide the AI tools that will enable

this. That is what's crazy. Like I said,

it's bonkers, right? This guy says it's

not up to me. It's nothing to do with

me. while also providing the the the the

means to do the thing. You know, it's

crazy. He's got no spine. So, this is

kind of funny. So, a user just goes like

a screenshot of the app store. You happy

now? And he just says, "No, also update

your apps."

So, this is a direct question. How do

you go from a tool for the betterment of

the human race to let's work with the

Department of War?

I value my liberty and safety and yours.

I believe that strong democracy and a

strong US in particular is a very good

thing for the world. The 16-year-old me

thought every country should just

abolish their defense department at the

same time. I wish he were right, but I

now but I now I know I guess I now think

the world is a much more fragile place,

but I now think the world is a much So

then he's like I want to recap this. I

want to like this is the most insane

attempt at damage control and I don't

think this has done anything for damage

control. Um it just goes to show you

what the hell is going on in open AI. Um

but he says this to sum up the AMA.

There is more open debate than I thought

there would be at least in this part of

Twitter about whether we prefer a

democratically elected government or

unelected private companies to have more

power.

I don't think that's accurate. From what

I've seen and my take on on that is it's

it's not about that. It's it's about the

the companies willing to provide their

systems which they know they're going to

be used for extremely nefarious you know

ambiguous legal loophole applications

which he is happy for that and other AI

labs are not well anthropic

specifically. I guess this is something

people disagree on but I don't this

seems like an important area for more

discussion. That's just a non- comment.

I think uh there is there is a question

behind a lot of the questions but I

haven't seen quite articulated what

happens if the government tries to

nationalize open AI or other AI efforts.

Obviously I don't know. I have thought

about it of course. It seems to me for a

long time it might be better building be

better if building AGI were a government

project but it doesn't seem super likely

on the current trajectory. That said, I

do think a close partnership between

governments and the companies building

the technology is super important. This

might be him saying we're please just

just nationalize us because we've got no

money. Please please.

I don't think it is though. People take

their safety in the national security

sense more for granted than I realized,

which I think is a good thing on

balance, but I don't think shows enough

respect to the tremendous work it takes

for that to happen. I don't know. I

don't again I'm not I'm not entirely

sure what you're saying there because

people's issue is they don't want to be

surveiled and and then other people are

worried about autonomous weapon systems

going out of control but mainly at the

moment is they don't want to be

surveiled because like I've said with AI

systems the data is kind of already

there but the AI systems can collect

that data and then build profiles much

faster and quicker than any other system

could do before. So you can get

detailed, you know, programs on people

and if you're a government, um, you've

obviously got tons of information on

your population. You can do all kinds of

things. You know, I'd dread to think

what's going on in China at the moment

because the amount of detail they've got

on all of their, um, civilians is is

crazy. And, and this, again, this is not

like me being naive. I obviously, you

know, a lot of the big American tech

companies have got tons of information

on all of us. You know, I'm not in

America, but Google knows everything

about me. You know what I mean? So, this

stuff goes on everywhere. So, this is

crazy. Now, um,

US military reportedly used Claude in

Iran strikes despite Trump's ban. So,

Trump calls Anthropic, a radical left AI

company run by people have no idea what

the real world is about, and then uses

their applications to then bomb Iran. I

mean, it's crazy. The US military

reportedly used Claude, Anthropic's AI

model, to inform its attack on Iran,

despite Donald Trump's decision,

announced hours earlier, to sever all

ties with the company and its artificial

intelligence tools. The use of claw

during a massive joint USI Israel

bombardment of Iran that began on

Saturday was reported by the Wall Street

Journal and Axios. It underlines the

complexity of the US military

withdrawing uh powerful AI tools from

its missions when the technology is

already intricately embedded in

operations. According to the journal, US

military command used the tools for

intelligence purposes as well as to help

select targets and carry out battlefield

simulations. On Friday, just hours

before the Iran attack began, Trump

ordered all federal agencies to stop

using Claude immediately. He denounced

Anthropic on Truth Social as a radical

left AI company run by people who have

no idea what the real world is about. Uh

the flaming row was triggered by the use

of Claude uh the use of claw by the US

military. In its raid to capture the

president of Venezuela, Nicholas Maduro

in January, anthropic object objected

pointed out that its terms of use do not

allow claw to be applied for violent

ends, to develop weapons, or for

surveillance. Since then, relations

between Trump and the Pentagon and the

AI company have steadily worsened. In a

lengthy post on X on Friday, the defense

secretary Peter Hexf accused Anthropic

of arrogance and betrayal, adding that

America's warf fighters will never be

held hostage by the ideological whims of

big tech. Hexf demanded full and

unrestricted access to Anthropic's AI

models for every lawful purpose. But the

defense secretary also gave a nod to the

difficulty of rapidly detaching military

systems from the AI tool given how

widely used they have become. He said

that Anthropic will continue to provide

services for a period of no more than

six months to allow for a seamless

transition and to better to a better and

more patriotic service which is code for

oh [ __ ] we need them and we're going to

use them now so we're just going to tell

them bollocks get rid of them but then

we're also I mean I've got to be honest

I think this is just a case of I don't

think they can be told no like the way

again I'm not going to get political

here but the way like I've I've read

this Trump administration if it's told

no it just goes crazy it's like that you

can't tell me no you're gone And that's

just how they they they act, you know.

And it was a valid thing that Anthropic

said like, "No, we don't want our

systems used for this." And they've

said, "Hang on, you've said no. You're

gone. It's" And then round the corner is

uh Sam Orman. Yeah, I'll I'll I'll come

in. Apparently, I've read six articles

on the Guardian this year.

Anyway, since the break of with

Anthropic, the rival company OpenAI has

stepped into the breach. Sam Ortman,

OpenAI CEO has said he reached an

agreement with the Pentagon for use in

its classified network of the company's

tools which included chat GPT. Okay, so

that's the situation we find ourselves

in at the moment. It is a very uh murky

situation. It's a worrying situation.

You know, we've got this development of

AI being used very clearly in you know

war scenarios. It's going to be used in

mass surveillance surveillance. It's

going to it's there's lots of

applications of AI which you know like

look I'm just going to say this. I think

what I want to say is I come at AI the

approach is a very like utopian approach

of let's cure all disease let's you know

cure things like famine let's cure um

the energy crisis right I think that's

what AI to me should be used for you

know or even cool stuff like let's work

out how

to communicate to a dog you know what I

mean we can communicate to dogs now but

you get what I'm saying right or what

what are birds saying when they're

talking to each other let's decipher an

animal language how do whales speak you

know this kind of stuff. The problem is

what we're seeing and and this is why it

pisses me off is it's being used for

generative creative purposes. It's

creating slop slop music, slop videos,

slop everything, slop text, slop

articles. Then it's being used for

autonomous weapons. It's being used for

surveillance. It's being used for battle

simulations. It's being used to select

and designate targets. I I dread to

think what AI has been involved in where

it's gone wrong cuz it will have gone

wrong and they would have covered this

up. And to me, it's very, very

frightening. And what worries me is you

can see these unscrupulous leaders of

some of these AI companies will just do

anything to get their AI systems to be

used, get them embedded. They don't care

almost what they're being used for. Some

of them do in the case of Anthropic, but

again, like I said, they were inside the

US military anyway. Um, so yeah, this is

a complex situation, and the fact of the

matter is right now, OpenAI does seem to

be suffering. In my previous video, I

did say I don't think this is going to

do much to OpenAI. The whole quit GPT

movement, which seem to be happening off

the back of their DO uh contract, which

does seem to be having an effect because

clearly Claude is the top app now on the

app store. It's the top AI app and just

the top app that's being downloaded. and

OpenAI is losing enough traction and

they're getting enough bad press that

Sam Alman's having to come out to do

this crazy AMA on Twitter which I don't

think has really helped with anything

because he's not really answered

anything there. At least I'm that's the

way I've read it. All right guys, thank

you for watching today's video. I've

been inside. So if you enjoyed this then

do subscribe to the channel as ever.

I'll keep you up to date on AI related

news and uh gaming news and all of that

stuff. And I'm actually going back to

play Marathon now because Marathon is a

weird game. It's a game which just gets

better the more you play it. I think the

aesthetic carries that game quite a lot.

Anyway, I'm out of here, guys. Thank you

for watching and I'll catch you on the

next video.