Could you explain how the Vietnamese were involved in the US democratic process that resulted in around 3 million of their people dying? Similarly, how are the Iranians currently involved in the US democratic process to veto the use of AI targeting against them? As a German citizen, how can I object to being surveilled by OpenAI products used by US agencies?
It turns out that those affected by this are actually excluded from the process by design.
One of the more curious perks of being a democracy seems to be that you can also democratically (within your own country) decide about the fate of people in other, nondemocratic countries and then get to enforce those decisions by military...
I don't think that OpenAI necessarily enforces or fundamentally respects the democratic process. After the recent Pentagon spat with Anthropic, OpenAI did not change their stance to conditionally demand lawful usage of their product.
OpenAI can market democratic values very easily, I'm sure the White House loves that kind of dog-and-pony show. But it's pretty clear that OpenAI does not genuinely care about Rule of Law, let alone preventing humanitarian disasters from citing ChatGPT as their abettor.
Could you explain how the Vietnamese were involved in the US democratic process that resulted in around 3 million of their people dying? Similarly, how are the Iranians currently involved in the US democratic process to veto the use of AI targeting against them? As a German citizen, how can I object to being surveilled by OpenAI products used by US agencies?
It turns out that those affected by this are actually excluded from the process by design.
One of the more curious perks of being a democracy seems to be that you can also democratically (within your own country) decide about the fate of people in other, nondemocratic countries and then get to enforce those decisions by military...
I don't think that OpenAI necessarily enforces or fundamentally respects the democratic process. After the recent Pentagon spat with Anthropic, OpenAI did not change their stance to conditionally demand lawful usage of their product.
OpenAI can market democratic values very easily, I'm sure the White House loves that kind of dog-and-pony show. But it's pretty clear that OpenAI does not genuinely care about Rule of Law, let alone preventing humanitarian disasters from citing ChatGPT as their abettor.
There isn't anybody who wants to solve problems for people to vote for anymore.