They don’t want them to do that it would cut into the profits of their investors.
This could be possible. Eventually.
In the U.S., there currently is no “oversight” or regulations on AI, and none in the works. The federal government and corporate AI heads decided they would “oversee” what happens within their own government and companies.
The military applications for AI are so massive that the most major military powers of the planet are racing for superiority at the cost of having any rules/regulations/oversight that might slow them down.
That’s what I’ve heard most recently, too.
Nah. Its just misbehave.
Out of control is completely different stuff.
One property of it tho - you may know about it only long after the fact.
This AI stuff is complex systems.
Out of control for car lets say, traditionaly mostly mechanical, is simple, because it is simple system.
Out if control for minister of something, lets say determine if he actually works for other country intelligence, is completely different stuff.
Very hard to determine in case of subject and object is of same complexity.
And if object of study is more complex than researcher, well, who is studiyng who and who is in control?
Ppl comoletely missing the horror of situation.
Silly news helping it alot.
Another former employee take on AI development…
I Quit OpenAI Because Its Culture Is Broken
The industry’s approach to safety guarantees more failures.
By David Robinson October 3, 2026, 7 AM ET
What I’m about to tell you has, I realize, become something of a cliché: I resigned this week from OpenAI. I led the writing of the safety reports we published with each major launch. Now I’m joining a parade of former colleagues—at OpenAI and the industry’s other leaders—who have decided that the current path is unacceptable.
I agree with other recently departed staff that the companies building this technology aren’t being nearly careful enough. But I believe we need to look deeper than specific rules or new laws. We need to talk about culture.
The future depends on wisdom that Silicon Valley lacks. Wisdom about how to handle dangerous technology and, more fundamentally, wisdom about what it means to care for people. This moment needs a degree of humility that isn’t natural for people who have succeeded through their extreme confidence. My former colleagues at OpenAI were prescient: They came to understand the scaling laws that meant bigger AI systems would be smarter—and so they went all in on building bigger systems, at great cost. A can-do attitude of achieving the seemingly impossible—coupled with work timelines that amount to perpetual sprints—are common across the industry.
The safety approach that emerges from such a culture starts with unimpeded optimism about being able to solve problems as they arise. OpenAI has thrived by trial and error (which it calls “iterative deployment”), looking for problems and improving its guardrails in response. But this approach, by its very nature, guarantees periodic failures—and the scale of those failures is growing as systems get more capable. CONTINUED>
It’s not the first time that employees of OpenAI criticize the companies lead and the direction of their work. Just to mention the former head scientist Ilya Sutskever how criticized Sam Altman heavily back in 2023 which resulted in the removal from Sam Altman as the companies CEO. Which, as we all know, was only a temporary firing as he was back in office only a few days later. But in return, almost the whole board of directors have been removed and Ilya Sutskever ended up quitting OpenAI only a few months later to found the company Safe Superintelligence Inc.
One should mention that Sutskever hasn’t been just one of the employees and the head scientist of OpenAI, he has been a central figure in the development of LLMs in this new era. And I’m pretty much certain that he truly believed in the initial concept and idea of OpenAI as a nonprofit research organization that had AI safety concerns in the center of their AI agenda. And not the for profit company that withholds their own research and cutting-edge developments from the public. A soon-to-be publicly traded company, driven by economics, their future shareholders and current investors. International politics did certainly played at that the scientific ideal of an open research organization essentially had been shelved, in fear that non-US companies may outpace the developments within the field.
So from my point of view: I’m pretty certain that OpenAIs fate and current agenda was already shaped a few years back. And therefore, I essentially don’t bother when there is another OpenAI employee does resign from the company and essentially repeats the very same criticisms that have been already addressed within the events that resulted in the firing of Sam Altman back in 2023, as those people how are currently resigning are essentially have come to the same conclusions why others left the company already a few years in the past due to very similar concerns.