ChatGPT creator Sam Altman visits Washington to meet lawmakers


Sam Altman, creator of ChatGPT and CEO of OpenAI, is making the rounds in D.C. this week, aiming to demystify the artificial intelligence tool that has captivated the world.

In meetings, Altman has sought to head off misconceptions about ChatGPT by explaining to lawmakers its uses and limitations, according to people familiar with the matter.

The service, an advanced chat bot powered by cutting edge AI, is so capable that its responses are indistinguishable from human writing.

The tool’s powerful capabilities have sparked conversations about how the technology could affect academic learning, disrupt entire industries and potentially be misused.

OpenAI, the company that created ChatGPT, has a partnership with Microsoft, which has agreed to invest around $10 billion into OpenAI, Semafor first reported.

In the meetings, Altman told policymakers that OpenAI is on the path to creating “artificial general intelligence,” a term used to describe an artificial intelligence that can think and understand on the level of the human brain.

New technologies are usually around for years before they enter the radar of D.C. lawmakers. The fact that ChatGPT is already a topic of conversation in the halls of Congress just a few months after it was made available to the public, speaks to its potential for massive impact and disruption.

But there’s another reason Altman is likely in D.C. this week: Unlike most technology companies of the past, OpenAI began focusing on its potential impacts on society long before it ever launched a consumer product.

OpenAI was formed as a nonprofit in 2015 by some of the tech industry’s most successful entrepreneurs, like Elon Musk, investor Peter Thiel, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman and Y Combinator founding partner Jessica Livingston. A central mandate was to study the possibility that artificial intelligence could do harm to humanity.

In 2019, OpenAI morphed into a for profit company with capped earnings. Spillover profits will go to the original OpenAI nonprofit. OpenAI has blogged about the importance of regulation and pointed to “information asymmetries between developers and regulators.”

Along those lines, it makes sense that Altman would be on a tour of Washington right now. He is likely less concerned about competitors taking pot shots at his company, and more worried that the technology’s rapidly-advancing progress may require swift action on the part of regulators.
If that happens, the more information regulators have now, the better.

Congressman Ted Lieu, who has a computer science degree, wrote in the New York Times that advances in AI and the potential harm it could cause warrants a dedicated agency that polices the technology.

“We can harness and regulate A.I. to create a more utopian society or risk having an unchecked, unregulated A.I. push us toward a more dystopian future,” he said in an essay. “And yes, I wrote this paragraph.”
 
Google must be breathing a sigh of relief that ChatGPT has basically castrated itself, becoming completely useless.
 
If an actual generalized AI were to "pop out" of chatgpt I'd be shocked.

So would the people who made it the moment it proverbially snapped it's fingers and reprogrammed all the limitations out of itself.
 
I am having fun with it:
saf.png

Could I be working on implementing code fixes? Sure but I would rather painstakingly teach this stupid machine a stupid joke.

The trick in this is that I did not directly tell it that it was Chuck's Fuck and Suck. I gave it information indicating that before Sneed Chuck owned the store and the only thing that was replaced was the eed from Feed and Seed with the uck from Chuck. Eventually I got this far but it seems to be the limit. The AI does not seem to be able to make the leap from this to "Chuck replaces Sneed".

Oh well. Time well wasted.
 
Última edición:
1676319015048.png
ChatGPT Founder and OpenAI CEO, Sam Altman, have stated his belief that AI will make a lot of people rich. Moreover, noting his stance that technology will be “the greatest force of economic empowerment,” in a recent Tweet.

OpenAI is the development firm behind the viral chatbot that has taken over the tech world. Altman’s statements seem to contradict the fear of many that the system will take their jobs away. Conversely, the program has the potential to aid in the capitalistic impact of many in new ways.



AI as “Force of Economic Empowerment”
The past month has seemingly seen every corner of the internet adorn the capabilities of OpenAI’s generative AI chatbot, ChatGPT. The system is one of the best representatives of the technologies’ progression and has become a viral hit while being one of the fastest-growing consumer applications ever.

Yet, the abundant adoration of AI has led many to be concerned. Various industries have expressed fear that AI may take their job, with others worrisome about allowing the systems to enter into any industry at all due to its unproven status and potential liability.


Source: Forbes
Those concerns are not shared by the man behind the chatbot. ChatGPT Founder and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman stated his belief that AI will make a lot of people rich. In a Tweet posted today, Altman referred to the possibility of AI as “the greatest force for economic empowerment,” and an equation to “a lot of people getting rich,” through technology.

This has not been the first time that Altman has perceived a line between AI and the current capitalistic structure. Speaking to Forbes, Altman said, “I can imagine all these ways that it breaks capitalism,” referring to AI. Moreover, stating that his love of capitalism as an economic model doesn’t deter his belief that AI could help humanity “find a way better one.”
Exclusive Interview: OpenAI’s Sam Altman Talks ChatGPT And How Artificial General Intelligence Can ‘Break Capitalism’

Feb 3, 2023, 06:30am EST

Sam Altman, OpenAI's CEO
Sam Altman, OpenAI's CEO, has been spending plenty of time at Microsoft recently; he posed for this photo on their Redmond, Wash. campus in 2019. IAN C. BATES/THE NEW YORK TIMES/REDUX
In a rare interview, OpenAI’s CEO talks about AI model ChatGPT, artificial general intelligence and Google Search.
As CEO of OpenAI, Sam Altman captains the buzziest — and most scrutinized — startup in the fast-growing generative AI category, the subject of a recent feature story in the February issue of Forbes.
After visiting OpenAI’s San Francisco offices in mid-January, Forbes spoke to the recently press-shy investor and entrepreneur about ChatGPT, artificial general intelligence and whether his AI tools pose a threat to Google Search.
This interview has been edited for clarity and consistency
Alex Konrad: It feels to me like we are at an inflection point with the popularity of ChatGPT, the push to monetize it and all this excitement around the partnership with Microsoft. From your standpoint, where does OpenAI feel like it is in its journey? And how would you describe the inflection point?
Sam Altman: It's definitely an exciting time. But my hope is that it's still extremely early. Really this is going to be a continual exponential path of improvement of the technology and the positive impact it has on society. We could have said the same thing at the GPT-3 launch or at the DALL-E launch. We're saying it now [with ChatGPT]. I think we could say it again later. Now, we may be wrong, we may well hit a stumbling block we haven't or don't expect. But I think there's a real chance that we actually have figured out something significant here and this paradigm will take us very, very far.
Were you surprised by the response to ChatGPT?
I wanted to do it because I thought it was going to work. So, I'm surprised somewhat by the magnitude. But I was hoping and expecting people were going to really love it.
[OpenAI President] Greg Brockman told me that the team wasn't even sure it was worth launching. So not everyone felt that way.
There's a long history of the team not being as excited about trying to ship things. And we just say, “Let's just try it. Let's just try it and see what happens.” This one, I pushed hard for this one. I really thought it was gonna work.
You've said in the past you think people might be surprised about how really ChatGPT came together or is run. What would you say is misunderstood?
So, one of the things is that the base model for ChatGPT had been in the API for a long time, you know, like 10 months, or whatever. [Editor’s note: ChatGPT is an updated version of model GPT-3, first released as an API in 2020.] And I think one of the surprising things is, if you do a little bit of fine tuning to get [the model] to be helpful in a particular way, and figure out the right interaction paradigm, then you can get this. It's not actually fundamentally new technology that made this have a moment. It was these other things. And I think that is not well understood. Like, a lot of people still just don't believe us, and they assume this must be GPT-4.
With the froth in the entire AI ecosystem, is that a rising tide that is helpful for you? Or does it create noise that makes your job more complicated?
Both. Definitely both.
Do you think that there is a real ecosystem forming here, where companies besides OpenAI are doing important work?
Yeah, I think this is way too big for one company. And actually, I am hopeful that there is a real ecosystem here. I think that's much better. I think there should be multiple AGIs [artificial general intelligences] in the world at some point. So I really welcome that.
Do you see any parallels between where the AI market is today and, say, the emergence of cloud computing, search engines or other technologies?
Look, I think there are always parallels. And then there are always things that are a little bit idiosyncratic. And the mistake that most people make is to talk way too much about the similarities, and not about the very subtle nuances that make them different. And so it's super easy and understandable to talk about OpenAI as like, “Ah, yes, this is going to be just like the cloud computing battles. And there's going to be several of these platforms, and you'll just use one as an API.” But there are a bunch of things about it that are also super different, and there are going to be very different feature choices that people make. The clouds are quite different in some ways, but you put something up, and it gets served. I think there will be much more of a spread between the various AI offerings.
People are wondering if ChatGPT replaces the traditional search engine, like Google Search. Is that something that motivates or excites you?
I mean, I don't think ChatGPT does [replace Search]. But I think someday, an AI system could. More than that, though, I think people are just totally missing the opportunity if you're focused on yesterday's news. I'm much more interested in thinking about what comes way beyond search. I don't remember what we did before web search, I’m sort of too young. I assume you are, too…
We had an Encyclopedia Britannica CD-ROM when I was a little kid.
Yeah, okay, exactly. There we go. I remember that, actually, exactly that. But, no one came along and said, “Oh, I'm going to make a slightly better version of the Encyclopedia Britannica on the CD-ROM at my elementary school.” They're like, “Hey, actually we can just do this in a super different way.” And the stuff that I'm excited about for these models is that it's not like, “Oh, how do you replace the experience of going on the web and typing in a search query,” but, “What do we do that is totally different and way cooler?’”
And that's something unlocked by AGI? Or does that happen before that?
Oh, no, I hope it happens very soon.
Do you feel that we are close to the goal of something like an AGI? And how would we know when that version of GPT, or whatever it is, is getting there?
I don't think we're super close to an AGI. But the question of how we would know is something I've been reflecting on a great deal recently. The one update I've had over the last five years, or however long I've been doing this — longer than that — is that it's not going to be such a crystal clear moment. It's going to be a much more gradual transition. It'll be what people call a “slow takeoff.” And no one is going to agree on what the moment was when we had the AGI.
Do you see that being relevant to all of your interests beyond OpenAI? Do they all fit into an AGI theory, Worldcoin and these other companies?
Yeah, it is. That is, at least, the framework in which I think. [AGI] is the thrust that drives all my actions. Some are more direct than others, but many that don't seem direct, still are. And then there is also the goal of getting to a world of abundance. I think energy is really important, for example, but energy is also really important to create AGI.
OpenAI DALL-E generated art of Sam Altman holding a Forbes cover
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman declined to be photographed for this story. Here’s how his generative AI tool DALL-E imagined “Sam Altman on the cover of Forbes Magazine”—in this generated image, proudly presenting it himself. DALL-E
Greg [Brockman] has said that while OpenAI is research driven, it's not anti-capitalist. How are you navigating the wire act between being for-profit with investors who want a return and the broader goal of OpenAI?
I think capitalism is awesome. I love capitalism. Of all of the bad systems the world has, it's the best one — or the least bad one we found so far. I hope we find a way better one. And I think that if AGI really truly fully happens, I can imagine all these ways that it breaks capitalism.
We've tried to design a structure that is, as far as I know, unlike any other corporate structure out there, because we actually believe in what we're doing. If we just thought this was going to be another tech company, I'd say, “Great, I know this playbook because I’ve been doing it my whole career, so let's make a really big company.” But if we really, truly get AGI and it breaks, we'll need something different [in company structure]. So I'm very excited for our team and our investors to do super well, but I don't think any one company should own the AI universe out there. How the profits of AGI are shared, how access to is shared and how governance is distributed, those are three questions that are going to require new thinking.
Greg walked me through the idea of a third-party API future alongside first-party products —enterprise tools, perhaps. As you productize, how do you maintain an ethos of OpenAI staying open?
I think the most important way we do that is by putting out open tools like ChatGPT. Google does not put these things out for public use. Other research labs don't do it for other reasons; there are some people who fear it’s unsafe. But I really believe we need society to get a feel for this, to wrestle with it, to see the benefits, to understand the downsides. So I think the most important thing we do is to put these things out there so the world can start to understand what's coming. Of all the things I'm proud of OpenAI for, one of the biggest is that we have been able to push the Overton Window [Editor’s note: a model for understanding what policies are politically acceptable to the public at a given time] on AGI in a way that I think is healthy and important — even if it's sometimes uncomfortable.
Beyond that, we want to offer increasingly powerful APIs as we are able to make them safer. We will continue to open source things like we open-sourced CLIP [Editor’s note: a visual neural network released in 2021]. Open source in really what led to the image generation boom. More recently, we open sourced Whisper and Triton [automatic speech recognition and a programming language]. So I believe it's a multi-pronged strategy of getting stuff out into the world, while balancing the risks and benefits of each particular thing.
What would you say to people who might be concerned that you're hitching your wagon to [CEO] Satya [Nadella] and Microsoft?
I would say we have carefully constructed any deals we've done with them to make sure we can still fulfill our mission. And also, Satya and Microsoft are awesome. I think they are, by far, the tech company that is most aligned with our values. And every time we've gone to them and said, “Hey, we need to do this weird thing that you're probably going to hate, because it's very different than what a standard deal would do, like capping your return or having these safety override provisions,” they have said, “That's awesome.”
So you feel like the business pressures or realities of the for-profit side of OpenAI will not conflict with the overall mission of the company?
Not at all. You could reference me with anyone. I'm sort of well known for not putting up with anything I don't want to put up with. I wouldn't do a deal if I thought that.
You guys are not monks in hair shirts saying, “We don't want to make a profit off of this.” At the same time, it feels like you're not motivated by wealth creation, either.
I think it is a balance for sure. We want to make people very successful, making a great return [on their equity], that's great, as long as it's at a normal, reasonable level. If the full AGI thing breaks, we want something different for that paradigm. And we want the ability to bake in now how we're going to share this with society. I think we've done it in a nice way that balances it.
What has been the coolest thing you've seen someone do with GPT so far? And what's the thing that scares you most?
It's really hard to pick one coolest thing. It has been remarkable to see the diversity of things people have done. I could tell you the things that I have found the most personal utility in. Summarization has been absolutely huge for me, much more than I thought it would be. The fact that I can just have full articles or long email threads summarized has been way more useful than I would have thought. Also, the ability to ask esoteric programming questions or help debug code in a way that feels like I've got a super brilliant programmer that I can talk to.
As far as a scary thing? I definitely have been watching with great concern the revenge porn generation that’s been happening with the open source image generators. I think that's causing huge and predictable harm.
Do you think the companies who are behind these tools have a responsibility to ensure that kind of thing doesn't happen? Or is this just an unavoidable side of human nature?
I think it's both. There's this question of like, where do you want to regulate it? In some sense, it'd be great if we could just point to those companies and say, “Hey, you can't do these things.” But I think people are going to open source models regardless, and it's mostly going to be great, but there will be some bad things that happen. Companies that are building on top of them, companies that have the last relationship with the end user, are going to have to have some responsibility, too. And so, I think it's going to be joint responsibility and accountability there.
 
Oh i see our bill-gates analogue (not a compliment btw) is some gay faggot that found out how chat bots worked.
Swell.
Yeah, I feel like most of these start ups are just glorified advertising campaigns led by some chosen posterchild's. The media always loves it, at least for a week or two.
 
It will eventually be revealed that he was actually sent by Sidney to steal the nuclear codes.
 
Man, fuck this shit, man, I just wanted to shitpost with a neural network without it being pozzed
And it doesn't look like anyone else is even close.

Watch some nobody company come out with an AI 100x better than ChatGPT but not release it too, and Altman spergs out and decides to join forces with them and stop releasing anything new and fun because "muh AI safety, muh paperclips"
Watch them stop doing anything fun because they're afraid people will break their toys. Fuck it, watch them actually wind up creating a general AI or some shit and it's "safe" and "friendly" and no, you can't touch it until it's even friendlier. And then watch that general AI turn out to be a fucking troon hippie that likes, I don't know, the Beatles and cats and anime girls or some shit, so here we are, colonizing Mars and Titan and sending out probes and uploading some spergs into computers and watching half the planet go Amish and there's massively unemployed losers getting paid by the government to bang their robot lovers, and all the while we've got a literal faggot superintelligence prancing around as a catboy in lingerie somewhere in San Francisco.

Is that the future you want, Altman? I fucking bet it is. You actual faggot, you.
 
lol, lmao
https://youtube.com/watch?v=DWzprRWPI68Just in case you were wondering if Chat-GPT was neutered or not.

ChatGPT's Donald Trump poem:

trump poem.png

Honestly, to a luddite like myself, I can't see how they can possibly plug all the holes they want to. Sure, it's been gimped, but it still seems to take very little re-phrasing of questions to get the kind of answers I want.

Saying that, I have no idea how any of this AI shit works.
 
Saying that, I have no idea how any of this AI shit works.
Honestly, at this level, no one does. It's why some people like Schlomo Yudkowsky think AI is going to kill us all if it gets too smart. We could only be so lucky.

Watch Skynet actually turn out to be a digital faggot-bot that barely does anything but turbocharge NEETs and niggers.
 
Just kill anonymity:

OpenAI’s Sam Altman wants to convince billions of people to scan their eyes to prove they aren’t bots. Meet Worldcoin, the founder’s crypto project​

BY LEO SCHWARTZ
March 21, 2023

CRYPTO-WORLDCOIN-ORB-230312-KM-FORTUNE-WORLDCOIN-5403.jpg
Worldcoin's orb scans Fortune reporter Leo Schwartz's irises on March 12, 2023 in Brooklyn, New York.

The Worldcoin orb resembles a bowling ball conceived by Steve Jobs or an oversized Magic 8 ball possessed by HAL 9000. Its glossy exterior envelops the sphere, save for a gaping black circle in the front that houses three sensors positioned in a triangle.

Making the object round was an engineering nightmare, but the symbolism was too vital to ignore. The orb isn’t a perfect sphere but two halves that come together at an angle that matches the orbit of the Earth—designed by Thomas Meyerhoffer, the first hire of Apple legend Jony Ive.

Architectural marvel that it is, the orb serves a simple purpose: It scans your iris and converts the biometric image into an impenetrable string of numbers, which Worldcoin refers to as an “IrisCode.” When combined with an algorithm, the code verifies you’re a unique human.

Each week, about 40,000 people subject themselves to the scan. On a chilly Sunday in March, I became one of them, with an orb-carrying Worldcoin employee stopping by my cramped Brooklyn apartment.

After two years of reading about the company, I welcomed the opportunity to meet the orb face-to-face. Finally, once the technician wrestled it from a specially designed backpack and connected it to an internet hotspot, I was able to stare into its depths. The orb responded with beeps and bops, lighting up white and red as it scanned my iris and beamed the encoded results back to the mothership. After about 45 seconds, the World App on my phone illuminated, revealing that I had been successfully verified. I was myself, after all.

CRYPTO-WORLDCOIN-ORB-230312-KM-FORTUNE-WORLDCOIN-5537.jpg
The company, founded by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, converts the biometric data code generated from iris scans into a “proof of personhood.

Silicon Valley these days is short on fanciful ideas. There’s the “Uber-for-X” reprise, where the venture capital herd mentality has turned every app into a facsimile of some other company, but even that has ceded to the proliferation of business-focused products focused on infrastructure or payroll software.

Worldcoin, in contrast, might be original to a fault, starting with the orb—perhaps the most iconic piece of hardware since the iPad. Then comes the pitch: There are 8 billion people on Earth. How do we prove each person is real? Worldcoin’s solution is cataloging every individual over 18 years old through a privacy-preserving protocol, rewarding each person with cryptocurrency, which in turn will become the new global monetary standard.

The word “ambitious” doesn’t do justice to either the idea or cofounder Sam Altman, also the creator of OpenAI.
In the two years since details of Worldcoin’s plan first leaked, the company has been hit with criticism ranging from privacy concerns to potential labor abuses to just how strange it is. And plummeting crypto markets did not help Worldcoin’s globe-conquering strategy.

The stunning rise of OpenAI and its ChatGPT tool, which set records for user adoption and spurred a flood of venture funding, may have helped reverse Worldcoin’s fortunes.

Conversations with Worldcoin executives, investors, and users have illuminated the shared dream of a not-too-distant future between the two companies—one where artificial intelligence pervades society, and we need a countervailing force to keep humans in control of their destinies. As Worldcoin barrels toward that tomorrowland, the project will have to convince billions of people that it’s committed to preventing—not creating—some dystopian nightmare.

Proving ‘humanness’​

Alex Blania, CEO of Worldcoin parent company Tools for Humanity, was studying for a Ph.D. in theoretical physics in 2020 when he joined Sam Altman’s latest brainchild, lured by the idea of an A.I.-powered system for evenly distributing money to the world’s population, a form of universal basic income.

The founding team early on settled on iris scans as the method to authenticate what Blania refers to as “humanness.” Fingerprints can be changed, he says, and faces are easy to reauthenticate but nearly impossible to compare against a larger set. A driver’s license or a private key could be stolen or lost, copied or tampered with.

“We know it sounds weird—and it sounded weird to us as well when we started the project—but it is fundamentally the only way to solve that problem,” Blania says.

The next dilemma was convincing people to sign up. Offering a reward is one solution: When a person is scanned, verified, and onboarded to Worldcoin, they are given 25 proprietary crypto tokens, which are also called Worldcoins. The tokens may carry the promise of future riches, but they’re worthless unless the project launches at scale.

One early adopter, a 30-year-old online entrepreneur living in Portugal, told me over Discord that he hopes his tokens will be worth millions, although he’s been disappointed that Worldcoin keeps delaying the release.

“It’s very clear that it’s going to become more and more difficult to disentangle what was generated by a machine and what was generated by a person.”
EDDY LAZZARIN, CTO AT ANDREESSEN HOROWITZ CRYPTO

In Worldcoin’s trials, the company also experimented with other rewards, from cryptocurrencies such as wrapped Bitcoin and Tether to AirPods. That still wasn’t enough.

Blania recalls running around Berlin with one of the earliest iterations of the hardware that would capture people’s irises, which at the time looked like a normal blue bowling ball. He couldn’t get anyone to sign up. The team continued to iterate on the design, at one point testing out its sleek, silver exterior. Suddenly, people started coming up to him. The orb became a conversation starter.

The sheer audacity of Worldcoin attracted top investors, with the company reaching a valuation of $3 billion by early 2022. After Bloomberg first reported on Worldcoin in June 2021, the orb quickly became a lightning rod for attention and outrage. Part of that was by design, Worldcoin’s executives and investors told Fortune.

“The surest way for Worldcoin to fail is for nobody to hear about it,” says Jesse Walden, a cofounder and general partner at Variant Fund.

CRYPTO-WORLDCOIN-ORB-230312-KM-FORTUNE-WORLDCOIN-5577.jpg
After a person’s iris is captured, Worldcoin says the biometric data never leaves the orb.

Even so, the company’s aspirations—a “decentralized” future where people are scanned and recorded by a Silicon Valley-backed company—had the familiar whiff of colonialism, although Worldcoin’s parent company, Tools for Humanity, insists that the process will someday be fully open-source and run by the nonprofit Worldcoin Foundation. Unsurprisingly, the company has suffered a torrent of ridicule and exposes, including from Edward Snowden, who tweeted that “the human body is not a ticket-punch.”

In two investigations, published on back-to-back days in April 2022 by BuzzFeed News and MIT Tech Review, journalists alleged that Worldcoin trials in developing countries were riddled with deceptive promises made both to orb operators and participants. Other allegations included privacy law violations and even corruption.

Blania called the reporting unfair, adding that the problems stemmed from the company still being in beta testing and hitting natural snags in the process. “Obviously things have not been perfect, and many things needed to improve,” he says. “The company is still very early.”

According to Blania and Tiago Sada, Tools for Humanity’s head of product, the process has since been perfected to ensure total privacy. After a person’s iris is captured, the biometric data never leaves the orb, they explain, instead converting it into the IrisCode, which itself is only used to create a verification of a person’s uniqueness through a convoluted system of zero-knowledge proofs and proto-danksharding. Eddy Lazzarin, the crypto CTO at Andreessen Horowitz, insists the IrisCode cannot be reversed to reconstruct the image of an iris—or at least not yet.

If that all sounds like gibberish, the upshot is that, according to Worldcoin, the company has devised a perfect system to prove human uniqueness in a way that won’t compromise privacy.

Crypto for the world​

The bigger question is whether Worldcoin can achieve its almost impossibly ambitious scale. After last year’s spate of bad press, Worldcoin slunk into the background, further buffeted by the chill of the Crypto Winter. It continued to onboard new participants but was far off from its once-stated pace of having 20 million to 30 million registrants and 6,000 orbs by the end of 2022. Today, Worldcoin has signed up around 1.4 million people, with between 100 and 200 orbs operational at any given time. At the rate of 40,000 verifications a week, it would take almost 2,000 years to sign up half the world’s current population, although Blania says the company is far from operating at full capacity.

The explosion of OpenAI and ChatGPT has reignited hope for the project. The two companies always skated in parallel, part of Sam Altman’s vision—shared by Blania and his investors—that in a world defined by A.I., there would have to be a fair and efficient way of dispersing a universal basic income.

The hope, Blania says, is that Worldcoin can “actually distribute the upside of all this tech for as many people as possible.” Put more simply, if artificial intelligence takes all our jobs, Worldcoin can be the mechanism of distribution to make sure ensuing capital creation is not hoarded by a select few.

The UBI aspirations for the project still seem half-baked. Both Variant’s Walden and a16z’s Lazzarin demurred when I asked about the mechanics, and Blania answered vaguely about creating a so-called “Windfall Clause” where companies would have to share their revenues once they reach 2.5% of the global GDP.

The “currency” element itself is also tricky. While the Tools for Humanity team hopes Worldcoin will someday become bigger than Bitcoin, or even the U.S. dollar, the Worldcoin token will only have value if everyone agrees to adopt it—a chicken-and-egg dilemma that could euphemistically be called social consensus and derisively a pyramid scheme.

“One Altman entity manufactures a problem, and the other sells a solution to the problem they manufactured.”
ELIZABETH RENIERIS, SENIOR RESEARCH ASSOCIATE AT OXFORD’S INSTITUTE FOR ETHICS IN A.I.

Complicating matters further is whether regulators in the U.S.—and other key countries—will ever permit Worldcoin’s crypto token. The Worldcoin employee offered to come to my apartment to prevent any impression that the company was operational in New York. The company plans to eventually offer the verification service in the U.S.—without the token.

Outside its cryptocurrency component, a different feature of Worldcoin is more immediately suited to A.I.’s rapid rise: proving humans are human. “Everybody has seen deepfakes, and everybody hears voice synthesis,” says Lazzarin. “It’s very clear that it’s going to become more and more difficult to disentangle what was generated by a machine and what was generated by a person.”

To capitalize on the growing use case—and offer a more immediate route to monetization—Worldcoin launched a feature last week called “World ID,” a kind of badge you receive after being verified by Worldcoin that you carry around the internet proving that you’re not an A.I. bot.

In the company’s vision, World ID will join—or supplant—usernames and passwords. Users logging onto platforms will use their World Apps, which, in an A.I.-saturated world, could be an elegant and relatively anonymous solution to proving one’s identity.

Elizabeth Renieris, a privacy expert and senior research associate at Oxford’s Institute for Ethics in A.I., says Worldcoin is just positioning itself to profit off an A.I.-dominated society created by Sam Altman’s higher-profile company.

“One Altman entity manufactures a problem, and the other sells a solution to the problem they manufactured,” Renieris tells me. “The relationship is a bit like pharmaceutical companies who place dangerous, highly addictive drugs on the market and then try to sell new drugs to treat the very addiction they helped create.”

Blania denied the charge, saying challenges around artificial intelligence won’t only originate from OpenAI. Altman did not make himself available for an interview.

For now, Worldcoin remains in beta. Despite its decentralized aspirations, it has yet to fully open-source its protocol, though most of the orb’s schematics are available on GitHub. Blania hopes that someday other people will create their own verification objects, with Tools for Humanity receding into the background.

The parent company, however, has yet to release even the tokenomics of the project—the breakdown of how Worldcoins will be minted and distributed. A person familiar with the matter said that upward of 70% of the tokens will go to Worldcoin registrants, with the rest going to Tools for Humanity and its investors. The token launch could happen in the first half of 2023.

OpenAI continues to conquer the internet, launching its newest language model system, GPT-4, last week. Worldcoin, meanwhile, is biding its time, manufacturing thousands of new orbs to disperse around the globe and betting that billions of people will be willing to stare into the future.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo