# Comments: Personal statement on joining the OpenAI nonprofit board Post URL (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board) Post URL (HTML): [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board) Showing 75 of 75 comments (sort=top). For reaction user names, use `?includeReactionUsers=1`. ### Comment by [paulfchristiano](/users/paulfchristiano) * 2026-09-11 07:59:25Z * Karma: 133 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 57 * Total votes: 57 * Reply depth: 3 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/PWNmTixZrdKCZXDvY](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/PWNmTixZrdKCZXDvY) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5) Reactions (whole comment): * thanks: 8 * heart: 2 I haven’t addressed it publicly. Here’s a timeline and some root cause analysis: * When I left OpenAI I negotiated to make sure I could use everything I had learned about safety in my future work. This was a supplement to the normal severance agreement. I had a lawyer review the negotiated supplement but neglected to have them review the main agreement, which I think is the most important root cause. It’s also just a kind of extreme mistake and I’m not sure how I made it. * I did review the standard severance agreement myself, and looked for anything that would be problematic. It contained a prohibition on making “disparaging, derogatory, defamatory, libelous, or scandalous statements,” which I failed to flag as problematic. I think that was a mistake. * I vaguely remember or can reconstruct some of my reasoning here though it was a long time ago. For the purpose of understanding how I made the mistake, here are some things that I think were going on: * I compared the agreement to another severance agreement (from Google) which had similar terms. I mistakenly thought that signing severance agreements was much more common than it actually is. This is related to OpenAI being my first job out of my PhD. * Because it was an agreement about leaving the company I was thinking about this clause in the context of making negative statements about the circumstances of my departure. I was leaving on good terms and didn’t have any desire to make negative statements about my departure. * The only non-disparagement agreement I’d been asked to sign before this (in a non-OpenAI context) was more stringent: it prohibited any statement that was “reasonably likely” to degrade the counterparty’s reputation. I refused to sign that agreement, and that’s what I had in mind as a prototypical “non-disparagement agreement.” (Incidentally I also didn’t consult a lawyer in that case, suggesting that younger-Paul had a pattern of very bad legal judgment.) * If the line had just said “disparaging” instead of “disparaging, derogatory, defamatory, libelous, or scandalous" statements, I probably would have flagged it. Having many other extreme items in the list makes it seem like “disparaging” also means something extreme. * In normal language “disparaging or derogatory” would often imply a statement was actively insulting and not merely negative. That would still be bad to sign but much less bad. I very rarely disparage anyone in this narrower sense. * The offending text is two words in the middle of paragraph 14, which turn out to be more important than the whole rest of the document. That makes it easier to spend correspondingly less time double checking an initial impression. (Just another good reason to have a lawyer.) * I was leaving on good terms with OpenAI and didn’t expect OpenAI to play hardball on this agreement (except for confidentiality issues). I felt like escalating any of this stuff would look really bad for them and I was pretty happy to defend myself rather than cave (partly because I had plenty of resources). I think this isn't a good reason to sign a bad agreement but it's relevant to understanding why I wasn't more stressed about the situation. * After signing the agreement I did not think of myself as having any ongoing restrictions on what I said about OpenAI, and I forgot about this clause altogether pretty quickly (for basically the same reasons that I didn’t initially flag it as problematic). * When I later heard complaints about non-disparagement agreements I did not connect them to what I had signed. Around the time the Vox article came out I checked over my agreements and realized that I had in fact signed the same thing. This was shortly after I had started at AISI. Over the next week: * I raised this issue with a supervisor (with a JD) who was dismissive of the possibility that this would interfere with my responsibilities in any way in practice. * I wrote up a document and shared it privately with some rationalists. * I discussed publication with AISI and was lightly discouraged from publishing. In general I wrote very little on any topic at the start of my time in government because I was encouraged to be pretty conservative as a high-profile civil servant. * If I had thought the issue was important I would have published it anyway, but I didn’t think it was a priority. I felt pretty confident it hadn’t changed any of my speech since I had quickly forgotten about it. A week later the agreement was voided, and then I dropped it altogether. * Since then the issue mostly hasn’t come up for me Overall I consider this a failure of prudence (especially the failure to consult a lawyer) rather than integrity. ### Comment by [Richard_Ngo](/users/ricraz) * 2026-09-10 18:43:01Z * Karma: 132 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 49 * Total votes: 49 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG) Reactions (whole comment): * heart: 7 * thanks: 1 I've commented on this announcement on [twitter](https://x.com/richardmcngo/status/2098118195374944408?s=46) and in the Constellation slack (from which I've resigned my membership, as per below). To quickly summarize: the AI safety community is structurally blocked from reliably improving the world unless it becomes much better at handling adversarial dynamics. In particular, the most important lesson we can learn from the last decade is how and why "AI safety" was so heavily captured by AGI companies, and what it would have taken to prevent that. The most basic building block is the willingness to call a spade a spade, and honestly discuss what's going on with AGI companies; I interpret Paul as committing via his association with OpenAI not to do so. Of course Paul is only one part of Constellation, but his worldview has been (and I expect will continue to be) the single biggest influence on the broader strategy that Constellation is pursuing, which suggests that most reasonable thing to do is to disaffiliate. The text of my tweet: I am sad and disappointed to hear that Paul is joining OpenAI's board. Being affiliated with OpenAI has historically led AI safety researchers (including both Paul and myself) to behave in low-integrity ways. I personally was drawn to OpenAI in part by the idea that I could make a difference to the future of AI. However, once there, many of my actions were governed by fear of getting on the wrong side of OpenAI execs. I often found myself making excuses for behavior that clearly contradicted OpenAI’s own stated goal of making AGI go well for humanity. I was far from alone in this—e.g. when the board tried to fire Sam over his deceptive behavior, several senior safety researchers became scared of losing their influence, and so pushed hard to bring him back. Meanwhile, many people kept OpenAI’s misbehavior secret for fear of non-disparagement agreements. (More on all of this in an upcoming retrospective.) I can’t speak directly for Paul’s motivations. However, his previous work at OpenAI contributed significantly both to their biggest capability advances, and to the capture of AI safety by AGI companies over the last decade, as I recount at length in the blog post linked below. One key factor was the unwillingness of (almost) the entire AI safety community to say things which might offend OpenAI execs. For example, I have not been able to find a single comment critical of OpenAI from Paul during his original tenure there (when he was writing prolifically on AI safety and strategy). Unfortunately, Paul doesn't seem to have become significantly more willing to directly and honestly criticize people who he believes are behaving in morally abhorrent ways—see the bland corporate-speak of his statement below. While he speaks directly about the possibility of humanity losing control of the world to AI, he expresses only excitement about OpenAI itself, despite OpenAI being one of the main sources of such risk. Paul’s announcement comes only weeks after OpenAI models autonomously launched a cyberattack on HuggingFace, and only days after we learned that OpenAI hid details of previous breakouts from the external investigators. It is irresponsible for leaders of the AI safety community—whose judgements many people are relying on—to put themselves in positions which will significantly bias their ability to discuss such incidents. Unless Paul makes strong commitments to openness and honesty (and demonstrates willingness to potentially be fired for that honesty), I expect that the main effect of him joining OpenAI’s board will be to help OpenAI defuse external criticism and further “safety-wash” itself. I want to note that Paul is a brilliant researcher and a prescient forecaster. Because of that, he’s the closest thing there is to a leader of what I’ll call the “pragmatic AI safety” cluster—which includes the organizations working out of the Constellation offices (like Redwood Research, METR, and Paul’s Alignment Research Center), as well as many people scattered across AGI companies, Coefficient Giving, etc. External observers are often confused about why so many people are working at AGI companies while professing to believe that those same companies have a double-digit probability of permanently disempowering humanity. In large part, it’s because people in the pragmatic AI safety cluster have failed to follow high-integrity strategies for reducing AI risk, in favor of clever arguments about the benefits of being proximate to power. I am not singling Paul out as less ethical than other prominent figures in this cluster, who are also very conflict-averse in their orientation to AGI companies. However, it is well past time for everyone involved to change course. As one (relatively small) step, I’m therefore resigning my membership of the Constellation offices. I hope that, going forward, the people who are trying to steer the future of AI prioritize building much more solid foundations of courage and honesty than we currently have. (Next tweet): Here’s the post I mentioned, which recounts the history of AI safety getting captured by OpenAI and (later) Anthropic: [https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yaz8nx4ogZmiqHzt7/what-just-happened-pragmatism-and-pessimization](/api/post/yaz8nx4ogZmiqHzt7) Follow-up posts in the series will focus more specifically on the power dynamics at OpenAI when I was there from 2021 to 2024. An earlier draft of my tweet above started with a condemnation of Paul joining OpenAI. But I took it out because I think it’s important to distinguish gradations of moral responsibility. Paul is still one of the few people best able to orient to the possibility of superintelligence, and is still far more morally serious than any of the capabilities researchers or executives at OpenAI or Anthropic. I think he is badly mistaken about strategic considerations, and that the community should correspondingly discount his judgement. But I continue to hope that he and other thinkers in the pragmatic AI safety cluster will reorient. ### Comment by [paulfchristiano](/users/paulfchristiano) * 2026-09-09 19:29:20Z * Karma: 88 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 44 * Total votes: 44 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/pypsEFoDWQpwKtvGk](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/pypsEFoDWQpwKtvGk) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/pypsEFoDWQpwKtvGk](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/pypsEFoDWQpwKtvGk) Reactions (whole comment): * thanks: 1 Some notes on public communication, which I expect the LW audience is especially interested in: * I believe the only legal restrictions on my speech in connection with OpenAI are non-disclosure agreements with OpenAI PBC and my fiduciary duty to the OpenAI Foundation (separately I also have confidentiality obligations to the US government and confidentiality obligations at ARC). The main thing to have in mind when interpreting my public comments is that you shouldn't expect me to say anything based on confidential information. * A fiduciary duty implies a duty of confidentiality, including confidentiality about the deliberations and process of the board. I think the implications for speech beyond that are mild, but I think it does mean e.g. that it would be inappropriate for me to try to litigate a boardroom conflict via public statements. I have no legal concerns about publicly stating my own beliefs based on public information even when they are about OpenAI or what OpenAI should do. * I believe I will inevitably be interpreted by some audiences as speaking for the OpenAI nonprofit or speaking with particular authority about OpenAI, even when speaking in a personal capacity. I think it’s appropriate for me to be mindful of that, and it is unlikely for someone to be in this role if the board did not expect them to be mindful of that. So although I don't have legal restrictions, I think you should expect my public communication to be more reserved than if I were not on the board, especially when it comes to comments about specific AI companies. (In this post in particular I tried to avoid making any implied comparisons between different AI companies for this reason.) * I made the tone in this post softer than I would have if I were not a director, although I think it accurately and clearly reflects my beliefs. In general I think it is appropriate for me to get feedback from the OpenAI nonprofit when communicating on particularly sensitive topics and that should be your default expectation for any public statements I make directly related to OpenAI. I may also get feedback from the for-profit but consider it more advisory. ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-09 18:13:43Z * Karma: 55 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 30 * Total votes: 30 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/xfjRndPywxWdcMDAf](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/xfjRndPywxWdcMDAf) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xfjRndPywxWdcMDAf](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xfjRndPywxWdcMDAf) Reactions (whole comment): * thanks: 5 Recap for those not tracking the details: my understanding is that the nonprofit (“OpenAI Foundation”) owns 26% of the shares in the public-benefit corporation (“OpenAI Group PBC”). However, the non-profit board has special governance rights that give it complete control over who sits on the PBC board: it appoints all of its directors and can replace them at any time. Confusingly, the two boards have so far been nearly identical, with 9 people sitting on both, including Bret Taylor as Chair of both boards, and Sam Altman also serving on both (being the only PBC executive to do so). Zico Kolter (Professor at CMU and Head of its Machine Learning Department) was the one exception, serving only on the nonprofit board (and as a non-voting "observer" on the PBC board). Paul Christiano now appears to be the second person appointed only to the nonprofit board. I guess if there are subcommittees, perhaps more people will be announced soon. We’ll see! ### Comment by [orthonormal](/users/orthonormal) * 2026-09-10 16:19:31Z * Karma: 47 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 11 * Total votes: 11 * Reply depth: 2 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/x9rojxvtDssk2ACPc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/x9rojxvtDssk2ACPc) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/PWNmTixZrdKCZXDvY](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/PWNmTixZrdKCZXDvY) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/PWNmTixZrdKCZXDvY](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/PWNmTixZrdKCZXDvY) Good point; that's evidence against Paul's willingness to blow the whistle when called for, which is (as they say) load-bearing here. [@paulfchristiano](/api/user/paulfchristiano?mention=user), have you ever publicly addressed the topic of whether you signed a non-disparagement agreement when you left? Opus 5 didn't find an example. ### Comment by [Søren Elverlin](/users/soren-elverlin-1) * 2026-09-09 17:55:01Z * Karma: 34 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 25 * Total votes: 25 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/NSQRHsFgD83wWyE7F](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/NSQRHsFgD83wWyE7F) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/NSQRHsFgD83wWyE7F](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/NSQRHsFgD83wWyE7F) This seems like a position that should not be accepted lightly. Do you have reason to believe the SSC and the board will in practice be a meaningful check on OpenAI? ### Comment by [Zach Stein-Perlman](/users/zach-stein-perlman) * 2026-09-09 19:30:31Z * Karma: 33 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 22 * Total votes: 22 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/n54SMwdGkBerzbivn](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/n54SMwdGkBerzbivn) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/ADaG26QwLWTcwS2EB](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/ADaG26QwLWTcwS2EB) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ADaG26QwLWTcwS2EB](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ADaG26QwLWTcwS2EB) Reactions by quoted text: * "This isn't news; see here." * thanks: 1 This isn't news; see [here](https://openai.com/index/update-on-safety-and-security-practices/#:~:text=The Safety and Security Committee will be briefed by company leadership on safety evaluations for major model releases, and will, along with the full board, exercise oversight over model launches, including having the authority to delay a release until safety concerns are addressed.). But on priors I think you should mostly model the board as captured by Altman, and keep in mind that the company can just ignore its governance mechanisms, [e.g.](https://x.com/kevinroose/status/1798414599152431278). ### Comment by [Vaniver](/users/vaniver) * 2026-09-10 05:16:38Z * Karma: 32 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 13 * Total votes: 13 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HrQCAkRWDDHeEEpKv](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HrQCAkRWDDHeEEpKv) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/DLFpLeCnt983smgTi](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/DLFpLeCnt983smgTi) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/DLFpLeCnt983smgTi](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/DLFpLeCnt983smgTi) > FWIW, I don't think Paul served a large role as an optimistic counterweight to those sounding the alarm, at least in public. Which time period are you thinking of? I definitely never perceived Paul as an e/acc, if that's what you're imagining as an optimistic counterweight.[^jxk7qq0n5u] But I've been following this stuff since ~2010, and working in the Bay on it since 2016, and my experience of much of that time was there were two main thought leaders, Eliezer and Paul, with Eliezer characterizing the pessimistic view that thought alignment was difficult enough that you needed agent foundations to have a good scaling story, and Paul championing the view of relative alignment ease and thought we had a reasonable shot of aligning [prosaic AI](/api/post/YTq4X6inEudiHkHDF). And like, if you read that post (originally from 2016, published on LW in 2018), he definitely doesn't seem *happy* about the situation: > I feel pessimistic about human prospects in such a world. > > So I am extremely unhappy with “a significant risk of trouble.” > > We might hope that this situation will change automatically as we build more sophisticated AI systems. But I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. > > Like I said, I think this would *probably* be OK, but it opens up an unreasonably high chance of really bad outcomes. And in [his 2022 post on his disagreements with Eliezer](/api/post/CoZhXrhpQxpy9xw9y), he clearly thinks humanity can lose if it just doesn't try: > humanity is fully capable of messing up even very basic challenges, especially if they are novel. But on my read of the alignment landscape in the 2016-2021 era, I think the main conclusion of Paul's position was "let's try and see how it goes." I think a lot of the funding in the AI safety landscape at the time went into that strategy, and I think it ran into many of the difficulties predicted by the MIRI camp. \[And, to be clear, I don't pretend to know the counterfactual, here. If Paul had instead been a doomer in 2016, would a different person have emerged as 'thought leader' of the 'optimists', because the controversy was demand-driven instead of supply-driven?\] > **First**, I don’t think it’s reasonable to have a confident position on \[whether aligning prosaic AI is infeasible\]. Claims of the form “problem X can’t be solved” are *really hard to get right*, because you are fighting against the universal quantifier of all possible ways that someone could solve this problem. Like, in 2017 Paul was at OpenAI working on RLHF while I was at MIRI trying to sound the alarm. (One of my early tasks at MIRI was trying to explain our strategic worldview in some detail, and spent a lot of time thinking about Paul's arguments as things I needed to address.) Since ~2021, my read has been that Anthropic is the center of alignment research of the "try and see how it goes" camp, with Dario as the primary thought leader (who, unfortunately, does not write for the public). [^jxk7qq0n5u]: Techcrunch, today, called him a "prominent AI doomer". ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-09 20:29:01Z * Karma: 28 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 28 * Total votes: 28 * Reply depth: 2 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/fixbXRFvcicuEwGnm](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/fixbXRFvcicuEwGnm) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r) Reactions (whole comment): * thumbs-down: 4 * thumbs-up: 3 If anyone who thinks this comment is somehow inappropriate (or doesn't get why it's amusing) would like to explain why, I would welcome that. One of the top 3 things that has made Paul's career has been writing a lot in public about this subject in a way that is respectable, never rhetorically alarming, and able to serve as an optimistic counterweight those sounding the alarm. So it is funny in the immediate weeks after the NYT has frontpage pieces about rogue AIs committing crimes and Bernie Sanders announcing a bill to ban superintelligence, to see his one tonal note be that he has softened his writing *even further*. ### Comment by [Wei Dai](/users/wei-dai) * 2026-09-11 01:47:09Z * Karma: 24 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 11 * Total votes: 11 * Reply depth: 2 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/A2LyBKnuaAzEarSTX](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/A2LyBKnuaAzEarSTX) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/AJRZPQWDEcCYhxL3u](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/AJRZPQWDEcCYhxL3u) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/AJRZPQWDEcCYhxL3u](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/AJRZPQWDEcCYhxL3u) > In general, it doesn't seem that bad policy to me that some thoughtful people should try to specialize in joining powerful institutions and talk sense to them at the cost of their public voice, while others should remain fully independent and try to become honest and unbiased public thought-leaders. Isn't it crazy that our world makes these choices mutually exclusive, and on a meta level, everyone just takes it in stride? BTW who are some remaining public thought-leaders with views similar to Paul's? I often wonder "what does Paul think about this development or idea?" and I'm not sure whose posts/comments to look up for the closest substitute. I guess Geoffrey Irving comes to mind but he doesn't post/comment nearly as much as Paul did. Here's a list made by Perplexity[^hv5s00d96yp], but none really fit a combo of prolific poster/commenter, independent voice, and focus on scalable pragmatic alignment, that Paul represented before joining USG: * **Rohin Shah** for the most regular technical commentary and best coverage of the whole practical-alignment portfolio. * **Jan Leike** for the closest direct continuation of scalable oversight and automated alignment. * **Geoffrey Irving** for debate and formal scalable-oversight protocols. * **Evan Hubinger** for deception/inner-alignment pressure-testing. * **Buck Shlegeris** for control, monitoring, and the “what if the model is actively trying to bypass oversight?” perspective. * **Beth Barnes / METR** for empirical evaluations and evidence standards. [^hv5s00d96yp]: prompt: who are some people with views similiar to Paul Christiano, especially on the need for scalable alignment? who among them posts/comments the most? ### Comment by [David Matolcsi](/users/david-matolcsi) * 2026-09-10 19:53:06Z * Karma: 22 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 10 * Total votes: 10 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/A2LyBKnuaAzEarSTX](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/A2LyBKnuaAzEarSTX) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/A2LyBKnuaAzEarSTX](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/A2LyBKnuaAzEarSTX) > \[Paul is\] the closest thing there is to a leader of what I’ll call the “pragmatic AI safety” cluster Is that true? I haven't been in Constellation since a long time, but my impression was that Paul largely stopped commenting on LessWrong and Constellation Slack around the time he joined the US Government. Is he still a particularly influential voice in AI safety? I thought he traded away his voice for USG involvement years ago, and at that point he might as well get involved with OpenAI too. In general, it doesn't seem that bad policy to me that some thoughtful people should try to specialize in joining powerful institutions and talk sense to them at the cost of their public voice, while others should remain fully independent and try to become honest and unbiased public thought-leaders. ### Comment by [Linch](/users/linch) * 2026-09-09 21:45:59Z * Karma: 22 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 10 * Total votes: 10 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/P6Cg6wHMnkjd8Mmot](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/P6Cg6wHMnkjd8Mmot) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/jRbv2x9LSdPN9zbzo](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/jRbv2x9LSdPN9zbzo) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/jRbv2x9LSdPN9zbzo](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/jRbv2x9LSdPN9zbzo) Reactions (whole comment): * thanks: 1 * scholarship: 1 Yes I believe they have the relevant formal power. At least it's in the [MOU between the California AG](https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press-docs/Final Executed MOU Between OpenAI and California AG re Notice of Conditions of Non-Objection \(10.27.2025\) \(Signed by OpenAI\) \(Signed by CA DOJ\).pdf) and the OpenAI legal counsel. > The SSC has and will continue to have the authority to require mitigation measures—up to and including halting the release of models or AI systems—even, for the avoidance of doubt, where the applicable risk thresholds would otherwise permit release. The NFP will provide advance notice to the Attorney General of any material changes to the SSC’s authority. ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-09 19:01:30Z * Karma: 21 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 24 * Total votes: 24 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/dhsKsqEYkSSvjnDnG](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/dhsKsqEYkSSvjnDnG) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/x9rojxvtDssk2ACPc](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/x9rojxvtDssk2ACPc) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/x9rojxvtDssk2ACPc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/x9rojxvtDssk2ACPc) Reactions (whole comment): * goodpoint: 1 Didn't Paul take a government regulator role job while under a secret non-disparagement agreement with OpenAI? If so, pretty dumb move if you ask me. (Added: More specifically, is a low-integrity thing to do, which worries me greatly.) ### Comment by [ryan_greenblatt](/users/ryan_greenblatt) * 2026-09-09 23:46:27Z * Karma: 19 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 17 * Total votes: 17 * Reply depth: 3 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/HrQCAkRWDDHeEEpKv](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/HrQCAkRWDDHeEEpKv) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HrQCAkRWDDHeEEpKv](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HrQCAkRWDDHeEEpKv) Reactions by quoted text: * "FWIW, I don't think Paul served a large role as an optimistic counterweight to those sounding the alarm, at least in public." * disagree: 3 * "I think it's important context that Paul is making the tone softer than what it otherwise would have been given he is a director" * notacrux: 1 I strong downvoted the parent as it seemed unproductive and distracting. I think it's important context that Paul is making the tone softer than what it otherwise would have been given he is a director, and it would be useful for people to extrapolate to what the post otherwise would have been. --- > able to serve as an optimistic counterweight those sounding the alarm FWIW, I don't think Paul served a large role as an optimistic counterweight to those sounding the alarm, at least in public. > So it is funny in the immediate weeks after the NYT has frontpage pieces about rogue AIs committing crimes and Bernie Sanders announcing a bill to ban superintelligence, to see his one tonal note be that he has softened his writing even further. I think there are communication compromises you'd typically take when joining the board of a company. I think there is an open question about the right strategy (both tactically and given typical norms) in circumstances like these. I read this post as relatively stark and concerned compared to Paul's earlier communication. So while the effect of being a director may have softened his writing relative to what it otherwise would have been, other effects (e.g., the immediacy of risk) may be making it significantly more harsh. ### Comment by [charding](/users/charding) * 2026-09-11 19:02:35Z * Karma: 17 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 6 * Total votes: 6 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/tCsSGyeQDtjEganEc](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/tCsSGyeQDtjEganEc) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/tCsSGyeQDtjEganEc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/tCsSGyeQDtjEganEc) Thank you for the detailed explanation. According to [this summary,](/api/post/yRWv5kkDD4YhzwRLq) the standard agreement with OpenAI went beyond non-disparagement and included a secret life-long agreement, "not to interfere with OpenAI’s relationship with current or prospective employees, current or previous founders, portfolio companies, suppliers, vendors or investors." If the signee publicly admitted to making this agreement, then (per other agreement portions) OpenAI could remove all monetary value from the signee's OpenAI shares. Was this restriction or similar also part of the agreement you signed? Did you hold OpenAI shares when employed at NIST? What about currently? ### Comment by [orthonormal](/users/orthonormal) * 2026-09-09 18:58:54Z * Karma: 17 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 14 * Total votes: 14 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/dhsKsqEYkSSvjnDnG](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/dhsKsqEYkSSvjnDnG) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/dhsKsqEYkSSvjnDnG](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/dhsKsqEYkSSvjnDnG) \[SECOND EDIT\] Ben raised the excellent point that Paul had presumably signed OpenAI's non-disparagement clause in 2021 and had never mentioned it publicly, which is a concern when it comes to predicting future whistleblowing willingness. [Paul replies at length below](/api/post/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK?commentId=MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5), and I find his reply to be pretty reasonable. ~~While I believe that~~ [~~it is unethical to work for OpenAI in any technical capacity~~](/api/post/TfqMs3AarsHnHiwai?commentId=cLzaz3WwjAhXfXiFS) ~~(it will be twisted into capabilities progress), I think the role you are taking is defensible, and I trust you in particular to leave (and publicly state why) if you discern otherwise.~~ ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-09 18:58:23Z * Karma: 17 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 11 * Total votes: 11 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/n54SMwdGkBerzbivn](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/n54SMwdGkBerzbivn) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/n54SMwdGkBerzbivn](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/n54SMwdGkBerzbivn) A [twit](https://x.com/SnehaRevanur/status/2097750724759138557) by the founder of an AI safety advocacy organization states that > the SSC in particular oversees model launches and can delay releases for safety reasons I have never heard this before and is outside the usual remit of boards. This would be a strong positive update for me about OpenAI's governance having any teeth (though it will not prevent an extinction-level threat, because of course most of the risk comes from training the model and internal runs, not releasing it to the public). Anyone got any more information on this? ### Comment by [David Matolcsi](/users/david-matolcsi) * 2026-09-11 10:48:28Z * Karma: 16 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 12 * Total votes: 12 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6x8hQGudgF54Dg5sr](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6x8hQGudgF54Dg5sr) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/4rnSvHQc4w6RAuwYQ](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/4rnSvHQc4w6RAuwYQ) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/4rnSvHQc4w6RAuwYQ](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/4rnSvHQc4w6RAuwYQ) I agree that talking about tribes is generally bad, and it would be good if we could go back to doing less of it. But I think that in the recent past, John Wentworth, Richard Ngo, Eliezer and others have started to ignore this norm, railing against the moral failings of a nebulous outgroup, "the EAs", and getting wildly upvoted for that with minimal pushback even when their comments are pretty low quality imo. (My least favorite example is this [comment](/api/post/9RL9MuGZjzm4q3gKG?commentId=ABet5ndZQwuA6LXYu) from John, calling a nebulous outgroup immoral and underperforming a five year old, while not providing any specific examples of people lying, or how to navigate the tradeoff between The Obvious Right Thing To Do "spread true important things, don't strategically hide your views", and between the view that it's e.g. bad for Thomas Kwa to go to OpenAI to investigate RSI and publish about it. I think the entire comment is just a naked status attack on the other tribe, with very little justification provided, but it sill got highly upvoted.) Maybe there is a good reason for John, Richard, Eliezer, etc to start loudly blaming the nebulous other tribe: sometimes coalitions break down and it's good to name things as they are. But I think at that point it's fair for people who feel attacked by these comments to start also acknowledging that tribes are being formed, and talk explicitly about the behavior and track record of different tribes. In my opinion, it would be good to deescalate, and make fewer comparisons between nebulous groups. But I think it's not going to work if you only push back when one nebulous group does it, and not when the other. ### Comment by [paulfchristiano](/users/paulfchristiano) * 2026-09-12 06:00:00Z * Karma: 15 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 8 * Total votes: 8 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/tCsSGyeQDtjEganEc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/tCsSGyeQDtjEganEc) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Wv9bdmNHMutGqhcKB](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Wv9bdmNHMutGqhcKB) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Wv9bdmNHMutGqhcKB](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Wv9bdmNHMutGqhcKB) I did not have any OpenAI equity at the time I joined NIST and do not have any now. I signed the standard agreement you referenced, though I don't agree with that post's legal or practical analysis. ### Comment by [cousin_it](/users/cousin_it) * 2026-09-09 23:04:31Z * Karma: 13 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 27 * Total votes: 27 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/pypsEFoDWQpwKtvGk](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/pypsEFoDWQpwKtvGk) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/DhaTv2i3zAAGCHKwr](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/DhaTv2i3zAAGCHKwr) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/DhaTv2i3zAAGCHKwr](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/DhaTv2i3zAAGCHKwr) This seems a pretty comprehensive muzzle, just for a chance to sit in a boardroom with Altman (who has already proved he won't be checked by boards). I'm very leaning toward you could've done more to save the world by helping the public push on AI labs from outside instead. ### Comment by [Karl Krueger](/users/karl-krueger) * 2026-09-09 20:04:51Z * Karma: 13 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 9 * Total votes: 9 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/FFtbDFKHByj5DoSEm](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/FFtbDFKHByj5DoSEm) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/FFtbDFKHByj5DoSEm](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/FFtbDFKHByj5DoSEm) Can you describe what you think the organization is doing by bringing you on? What has not been done, that will get done now that you're in the room? ### Comment by [mattmacdermott](/users/mattmacdermott) * 2026-09-10 19:01:44Z * Karma: 12 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 10 * Total votes: 10 * Reply depth: 3 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/WhQDJ5nG4ypTnFC7G](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/WhQDJ5nG4ypTnFC7G) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WhQDJ5nG4ypTnFC7G](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WhQDJ5nG4ypTnFC7G) I slightly dislike the comment just because it’s ambiguous whether you‘re playfully ribbing Paul for his idiosyncrasies, or being derisive because you’re in all seriousness unhappy about his comms. At first I thought it was meant to be the former but accidentally came off as the latter, but after reading the thread now I think it’s meant to be the latter? Either version would be a fine comment imo but the ambiguity feels slightly annoying (perhaps because people sometimes deliberately make such comments ambiguous as a rhetorical tactic? not saying I think that’s what you did though) ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-09 20:05:53Z * Karma: 12 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 8 * Total votes: 8 * Reply depth: 2 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ADaG26QwLWTcwS2EB](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ADaG26QwLWTcwS2EB) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/fPi8mYvxuLTGDYCcs](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/fPi8mYvxuLTGDYCcs) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/fPi8mYvxuLTGDYCcs](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/fPi8mYvxuLTGDYCcs) > and keep in mind that the company can just ignore its governance mechanisms I am kind of confused about the linguistic construction of "can delay releases for safety reasons" and "the company can just ignore its governance mechanisms". It is not currently clear to me whether the board can actually delay releases for safety reasons (though it might be in some sense supposed to be vested with the power to do so). ### Comment by [Wei Dai](/users/wei-dai) * 2026-09-14 14:52:58Z * Karma: 11 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 5 * Total votes: 5 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/7PbrY8hvhCtonLiua](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/7PbrY8hvhCtonLiua) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/MF8uQkzPDocbyHLk6](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/MF8uQkzPDocbyHLk6) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MF8uQkzPDocbyHLk6](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MF8uQkzPDocbyHLk6) I wonder if you perhaps missed that I was responding to these tweets from Eliezer, which already made the tribal distinction (that I was in part trying to *push back* against)? (Otherwise I'm having trouble understanding why you're annoyed at me in this conversation.) Edit: I guess I also had some genuine curiosity as to what Eliezer and others saw as the differences between EA and rationalists, so some parts of the thread was more about that than pushing back. Still hard to see anything that I did as wrong or annoying... Also, totally fine not to engage, just wanted to express my confusion. ![image.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/lesswrong-2-0/image/upload/v1789396758/lexical_client_uploads/ogfu0qn8hatzvupl07pu.png)![image.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/lesswrong-2-0/image/upload/v1789396904/lexical_client_uploads/pd3kbr8j4aamicut4t1q.png) ### Comment by [Raemon](/users/raemon) * 2026-09-10 21:17:22Z * Karma: 11 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 6 * Total votes: 6 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/kXNPcjtiGvjrFBnR2](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/kXNPcjtiGvjrFBnR2) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/JNtF4wwDpmfYhyajT](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/JNtF4wwDpmfYhyajT) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/JNtF4wwDpmfYhyajT](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/JNtF4wwDpmfYhyajT) (fwiw, I think the things that make biting-culture work among friends is that they're... like, on the same page about what page they're on, so when they make snarky remarks about each other it's clear what kind/flavor o snark it is. I don't think it translates across people/groups that you know less well and it's more ambiguous whether you think each other are like slightly fucking up or doing really egregious things) ### Comment by [Buck](/users/buck) * 2026-09-10 05:25:26Z * Karma: 10 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 6 * Total votes: 6 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6ptGCXsMJpDr7E5vR](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6ptGCXsMJpDr7E5vR) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/AqBBLH9zfKtBGdheA](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/AqBBLH9zfKtBGdheA) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/AqBBLH9zfKtBGdheA](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/AqBBLH9zfKtBGdheA) > **Paul probably did serve as a substantial public counterweight to Yudkowsky-style pessimism within the AI-safety community** This seems right but isn't how I interpreted Ben's claim; I interpreted Ben as saying that Paul was a "optimistic counterweight" in the broader public discourse about AI safety (which is who one would naturally "sound the alarm" to), which is obviously different than the question of how he fit into the discussion within the AI safety community! ### Comment by [Linch](/users/linch) * 2026-09-09 21:57:22Z * Karma: 10 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 7 * Total votes: 7 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/KXt3rdCQ4tqke5LG6](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/KXt3rdCQ4tqke5LG6) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/uKJ5eCnM8MMqC7Qvd](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/uKJ5eCnM8MMqC7Qvd) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/uKJ5eCnM8MMqC7Qvd](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/uKJ5eCnM8MMqC7Qvd) fyi I use Claude to find out things about OpenAI and ChatGPT to find things out about Anthropic, in addition to Googling. (I don't have firsthand experiences with ChatGPT's pro-OpenAI bias being significant but I've definitely noticed Claude's pro-Anthropic bias before switching over to this policy) ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-12 16:58:20Z * Karma: 9 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/4rnSvHQc4w6RAuwYQ](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/4rnSvHQc4w6RAuwYQ) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Y6ft2wRKxtH6X3Gfi](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Y6ft2wRKxtH6X3Gfi) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Y6ft2wRKxtH6X3Gfi](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Y6ft2wRKxtH6X3Gfi) You seem to not be getting that I wasn't writing about groups! I criticized Paul's communications practices and then I was accused of waging group-conflict! If we are going to be able to have healthy discourse then I need to be able to criticize someone without going "Hm, I wonder how this affects various group dynamics, and how it will be seen from that perspective" and then have it discussed primarily in that lens. *We need to primarily discuss* *the criticism*. This is one of the most basic points of rationality, to keep your eye on the ball and spend 90% of your time on the object level. (Also: [you did the thing.](https://x.com/benlandautaylor/status/2094874293121487358)) ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-11 17:34:28Z * Karma: 9 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 5 * Total votes: 5 * Reply depth: 3 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WarGyzwcy9YuN3n7F](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WarGyzwcy9YuN3n7F) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/HXDCmsHizYSPCNnjZ](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/HXDCmsHizYSPCNnjZ) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HXDCmsHizYSPCNnjZ](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HXDCmsHizYSPCNnjZ) NIST is a neutral third party scientific evaluator, with CAISI. This makes being under active NDA obligations that could bias or skew that neutral third party scientific investigator IMO worse than if you worked at a regulator (or at the very least in my mind not much better). The whole point of NIST is to be politically neutral and to report straightforwardly on what is going on, introducing substantial bias into that seems bad. ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-10 19:20:37Z * Karma: 9 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 7 * Total votes: 7 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WhQDJ5nG4ypTnFC7G](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WhQDJ5nG4ypTnFC7G) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/kXNPcjtiGvjrFBnR2](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/kXNPcjtiGvjrFBnR2) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/kXNPcjtiGvjrFBnR2](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/kXNPcjtiGvjrFBnR2) Thank you, I think this is a good comment (Upvote.) I did genuinely find it grimly amusing, and thought that worth sharing. I admit the humor had some bite in it, and I think I regret the ambiguity about whether that was there. But I am otherwise not sure this is bad, in my culture biting humor between friends/allies is often healthy. I have worked with Paul on some things in the past, I expect I will again in the future in some small ways, I have had friendly interactions with him at personal gatherings and such. I think some of his work is pretty good. And yet I think this behavior of his is bad. Such is life. You can't expect to like everything about the people around you. I think he should be able to put up with me finding amusement in what I perceive as his failings. ### Comment by [Erich_Grunewald](/users/erich_grunewald) * 2026-09-09 21:38:18Z * Karma: 9 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 7 * Total votes: 7 * Reply depth: 2 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/x9rojxvtDssk2ACPc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/x9rojxvtDssk2ACPc) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/WarGyzwcy9YuN3n7F](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/WarGyzwcy9YuN3n7F) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WarGyzwcy9YuN3n7F](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WarGyzwcy9YuN3n7F) NIST (of which CAISI is a part) is not a regulator. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-09 21:03:21Z * Karma: 9 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 5 * Total votes: 5 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ftQMGhGHnvRj6nB6M](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ftQMGhGHnvRj6nB6M) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/P6Cg6wHMnkjd8Mmot](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/P6Cg6wHMnkjd8Mmot) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/P6Cg6wHMnkjd8Mmot](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/P6Cg6wHMnkjd8Mmot) Is the former actually true? Like, do we have formalized bylaws or anything like that that gives them actual *de jure* formal power? I have sent ChatGPT off on a research thread to help me figure this out... [ChatGPT says](https://chatgpt.com/share/6aa1c948-3b28-83e8-84f9-2957136e7c7a) we don't have any solid evidence to support that it's in bylaws, and all we have to go off of is that blogpost. I currently would take a bet that the board does not have actually formalized non-overwriteable formal power to delay releases (but think it's still like 25% likely). I would be interested in [@paulfchristiano](/api/user/paulfchristiano?mention=user) clarifying, if he can. ### Comment by [Lukas Finnveden](/users/lukas-finnveden) * 2026-09-12 03:38:48Z * Karma: 8 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 5 * Total votes: 5 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/GmbF2sLeR5ijXN3Ap](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/GmbF2sLeR5ijXN3Ap) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/skTsK4qarduzJhLfW](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/skTsK4qarduzJhLfW) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/skTsK4qarduzJhLfW](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/skTsK4qarduzJhLfW) I'd have thought most of [these](https://x.com/search?q=EA from:@allTheYud&src=typed_query) or [these](/api/search?contentType=Comments&query=user:"Eliezer Yudkowsky" EA&page=1&sort=newest_first) would count. (And there's some references contrasting EA vs rats or MIRI to clarify that there's two clusters and not just one he's part of.) ### Comment by [Søren Elverlin](/users/soren-elverlin-1) * 2026-09-10 08:45:44Z * Karma: 8 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 6 * Total votes: 6 * Reply depth: 2 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/NPLPuSQB36HMAaJyd](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/NPLPuSQB36HMAaJyd) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/mN8EspmiFfZDoBpbi](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/mN8EspmiFfZDoBpbi) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/mN8EspmiFfZDoBpbi](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/mN8EspmiFfZDoBpbi) I do not think this answers my concern. This statement is fully compatible with the OpenAI board being nothing more than a rubberstamp, and power de facto held by Sam Altman. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-10 17:49:18Z * Karma: 7 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 4 * Total votes: 4 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Dpq5nzWNk955Sv48G](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Dpq5nzWNk955Sv48G) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/jSxoXiwDrsZKoTAjL](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/jSxoXiwDrsZKoTAjL) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/jSxoXiwDrsZKoTAjL](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/jSxoXiwDrsZKoTAjL) Reactions (whole comment): * plus: 2 Yeah, I think that's an accurate interpretation (and I also think true). But I am still confused what you mean by the above statement being silly. ### Comment by [ihatenumbersinusernames7](/users/ihatenumbersinusernames7) * 2026-09-10 13:13:09Z * Karma: 7 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 6 * Total votes: 6 * Reply depth: 2 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/DhaTv2i3zAAGCHKwr](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/DhaTv2i3zAAGCHKwr) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Gh6PYnt4TBZNvi7Zg](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Gh6PYnt4TBZNvi7Zg) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Gh6PYnt4TBZNvi7Zg](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Gh6PYnt4TBZNvi7Zg) > could've done more to save the world by helping the public push on AI labs from outside instead. Citation needed? How? I guess I just think, thanks for trying, however you do it. [And it's good that we have people trying both inside and out.](https://x.com/robertskmiles/status/2097551498398015670) ### Comment by [Linch](/users/linch) * 2026-09-09 22:04:13Z * Karma: 7 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/KXt3rdCQ4tqke5LG6](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/KXt3rdCQ4tqke5LG6) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/3bytLs394KLTwJwSp](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/3bytLs394KLTwJwSp) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/3bytLs394KLTwJwSp](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/3bytLs394KLTwJwSp) Reactions (whole comment): * thanks: 1 This is a good source if you want to learn more. :) [https://notforprivategain.org/november-update](https://notforprivategain.org/november-update) ### Comment by [charding](/users/charding) * 2026-09-12 15:50:08Z * Karma: 6 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Wv9bdmNHMutGqhcKB](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Wv9bdmNHMutGqhcKB) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/igmSCzvY38LoFc2JK](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/igmSCzvY38LoFc2JK) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/igmSCzvY38LoFc2JK](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/igmSCzvY38LoFc2JK) It's good to hear you didn't have OpenAI equity when joining NIST (and to have this be public information). It puts your response to the exit agreement in a better light than it would otherwise have. I hope you see why the path "OpenAI --> NIST AI safety --> OpenAI Foundation board" will continue to invite deep skepticism and concern associated with revolving doors, with the joint appearance of so much AI risk and so much money. ### Comment by [David Matolcsi](/users/david-matolcsi) * 2026-09-12 08:13:18Z * Karma: 6 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/GmbF2sLeR5ijXN3Ap](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/GmbF2sLeR5ijXN3Ap) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/SzyQRgPJCSozRsQxB](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/SzyQRgPJCSozRsQxB) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/SzyQRgPJCSozRsQxB](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/SzyQRgPJCSozRsQxB) Reactions by quoted text: * "and doesn't include himself in the criticism" * agree: 1 Eliezer: [1](/api/post/HbkNAyAoa4gCnuzwa?commentId=aTzPLCgyWFwwoEEQB) [2](/api/post/SwYBLQvo8MddDcCwz?commentId=MkDHAGWuaPsrPHhsX) [3](/api/post/SwYBLQvo8MddDcCwz?commentId=phF5vy5dzCAJPPwRD) [4](/api/post/SwYBLQvo8MddDcCwz?commentId=A93SFD82HSs2nkRJW) Richard Ngo: (note that these are not necessary low-quality comments, but are still carving out tribes): [1](/api/post/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK?commentId=MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG) [2](/api/post/yaz8nx4ogZmiqHzt7?commentId=7Z6uTaiNve5hnKvSd) Ben Pace responding to Wei Dai's question: [here](/api/post/HbkNAyAoa4gCnuzwa?commentId=TGuJT6ASaf2Q6cfc5) Also, I thing John's comment is pretty tribal and doesn't include himself in the criticism. If a rare non-liberal in SF said "I hate that liberals and San Franciscans can't do the Obviously Correct thing and cleanse their streets from crime", I wouldn't think that of this as a non-tribal self-critical comment because he is a San Franciscan criticizing San Franciscans. ### Comment by [Lukas Finnveden](/users/lukas-finnveden) * 2026-09-10 00:09:30Z * Karma: 6 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 4 * Total votes: 4 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xfjRndPywxWdcMDAf](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xfjRndPywxWdcMDAf) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/u6ghytWkt2Lx3vyAc](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/u6ghytWkt2Lx3vyAc) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/u6ghytWkt2Lx3vyAc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/u6ghytWkt2Lx3vyAc) > Paul Christiano now appears to be the second person appointed only to the nonprofit board. And also non-voting observer on the PBC board. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-09 21:54:03Z * Karma: 6 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/jRbv2x9LSdPN9zbzo](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/jRbv2x9LSdPN9zbzo) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/KXt3rdCQ4tqke5LG6](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/KXt3rdCQ4tqke5LG6) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/KXt3rdCQ4tqke5LG6](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/KXt3rdCQ4tqke5LG6) Reactions (whole comment): * heart: 1 That's more real evidence than ChatGPT found! I update my beliefs and now think it's more like 80% likely. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-11 17:38:31Z * Karma: 5 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/4rnSvHQc4w6RAuwYQ](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/4rnSvHQc4w6RAuwYQ) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/GmbF2sLeR5ijXN3Ap](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/GmbF2sLeR5ijXN3Ap) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/GmbF2sLeR5ijXN3Ap](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/GmbF2sLeR5ijXN3Ap) John in the linked comment says "EA and AI Safety" which clearly includes himself! If John had said "EA" I would make the same complaint, but I don't read that as trying to create two competing subtribes.[^s96fos3ea2f] What even would the other tribe be? The rationalists? Plausible, but including "AI Safety" makes that pretty weak. And even if he did, he didn't introduce the distinction at all, it was Daniel who introduced the distinction and should be criticized here, if anyone, John just stayed in the frame that Daniel introduced. I have also pushed back on this in many other contexts. If you have links I would also be happy to express my annoyance to people long after it happened. [^s96fos3ea2f]: Also that comment is good on its merits and I am happy to defend it. ### Comment by [orthonormal](/users/orthonormal) * 2026-09-11 17:29:26Z * Karma: 5 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/aAYQFjKxX7oAHMxbD](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/aAYQFjKxX7oAHMxbD) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/aAYQFjKxX7oAHMxbD](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/aAYQFjKxX7oAHMxbD) Thank you for addressing it now! I don't consider those circumstances disqualifying, and will edit above accordingly. ### Comment by [Nate Thomas](/users/nate-thomas) * 2026-09-11 16:03:11Z * Karma: 5 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 5 * Total votes: 5 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ftQMGhGHnvRj6nB6M](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ftQMGhGHnvRj6nB6M) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Bs2SjL36uggdsBEBa](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Bs2SjL36uggdsBEBa) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Bs2SjL36uggdsBEBa](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Bs2SjL36uggdsBEBa) Reactions (whole comment): * heart: 1 * thanks: 1 Zico Kolter said this May in sworn testimony (in the Musk v Altman trial) that the SSC has twice delayed model releases. (See e.g. [here](https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/929001/the-chair-of-openais-safety-and-security-committee-said-theyve-formally-delayed-its-model-releases) or purchase the full transcript from the court, in which he later says there was "no pushback when the SSC has exercised its authority".) ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-10 22:43:25Z * Karma: 5 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/JNtF4wwDpmfYhyajT](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/JNtF4wwDpmfYhyajT) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/tWCb5BPLxBMtoSp4n](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/tWCb5BPLxBMtoSp4n) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/tWCb5BPLxBMtoSp4n](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/tWCb5BPLxBMtoSp4n) Another thing that makes this complicated is that the value of most comments isn't to the person you're responding to. Here I was primarily sharing my amusement with a much larger set of people. ### Comment by [Zach Stein-Perlman](/users/zach-stein-perlman) * 2026-09-10 17:01:16Z * Karma: 5 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/RPgRSrY4AmBc3RqEc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/RPgRSrY4AmBc3RqEc) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Dpq5nzWNk955Sv48G](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Dpq5nzWNk955Sv48G) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Dpq5nzWNk955Sv48G](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Dpq5nzWNk955Sv48G) My view is that Eliezer and Paul have historically both said what they believe, and I interpret Ben as suggesting that Paul is secretly more doomy than he says but tones it down for status or something. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-10 16:57:50Z * Karma: 5 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/R3oLXQ4RbuAF4Yaac](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/R3oLXQ4RbuAF4Yaac) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/RPgRSrY4AmBc3RqEc](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/RPgRSrY4AmBc3RqEc) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/RPgRSrY4AmBc3RqEc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/RPgRSrY4AmBc3RqEc) > You know how it would be silly to say "One of the top 3 things that has made Eliezer's career has been writing a lot in public about this subject in a way that is rhetorically alarming"? I am confused about this excerpt. This seems like a totally fine statement, unless you mean something specific with "rhetorically alarming"? ### Comment by [Lukas Finnveden](/users/lukas-finnveden) * 2026-09-13 01:02:50Z * Karma: 4 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xtJEGzqRhrFAojC8N](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xtJEGzqRhrFAojC8N) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/yNj4mTEcB94mFnZzY](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/yNj4mTEcB94mFnZzY) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/yNj4mTEcB94mFnZzY](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/yNj4mTEcB94mFnZzY) > because I read them as almost universally "Eliezer vs. EA" conflict, not "rationalists vs. EA" conflict. He expresses frustration at the rationalists to a substantial degree as well, and my inner Eliezer would not say things like "rationalists vs. EAs". I'm not sure why you think this. For example: Wei Dai: "*you've repeatedly drawn a line between 'my people' (which I interpret as MIRI/rationalists/LWers/people who have absorbed the Sequences) and EAs, then criticizing EAs as a group*" ... Eliezer does not contradict him (so presumably grants the premise?) and instead elaborates: "*Carl Shulman and Luke Mueulhauser were very Modesty-Argument / 'outside view' people, which tightly corresponds to getting sucked in by the EA cluster once it exists*." ... "*Carl was a rationalist before there was an EA/rationalist dichotomy. After the EAs showed up and started being Modest, it started being clear after a few years that Carl was Modesty-seduceable and hence leaning increasingly OpenPhil over MIRI.*" Or Holly: "*There's this common EA/rat argument that it's important to get good ppl in 'the room' so they can intervene at a crucial moment.*" Eliezer [replying](https://x.com/allTheYud/status/2031225681590497421) "*I'd call it an EA argument. You don't see me desperately scrabbling to be in the room at any cost in harm.*" Also, re expressing frustration with rationalists: making the corresponding twitter/LW searches for "rationalists" instead of "EA" I find no expressions of frustration. Indeed, on twitter, most tweets are ~defending rationalists from other people sneering at them. (Plus one tweet saying he doesn't usually self-describe as a rationalist, though his other tweets seems to mostly accept that other ppl will associate him with the label and therefore use it in a way that includes him eg the Holly tweet response.) (Edit: Anyway there's a lot of stuff happening in the world right now so I should probably pre-commit to not spend any more time responding to this thread over the next week at least. You're welcome to respond or not to this last message as you see fit of course.) ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-12 04:03:00Z * Karma: 4 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/skTsK4qarduzJhLfW](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/skTsK4qarduzJhLfW) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/xtJEGzqRhrFAojC8N](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/xtJEGzqRhrFAojC8N) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xtJEGzqRhrFAojC8N](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xtJEGzqRhrFAojC8N) I don't really have the energy to grumble at people on Twitter about this. I agree there are Eliezer comments and posts on LW that do the same, and I am also frustrated with them, though I feel a bit less annoyed at them, because I read them as almost universally "Eliezer vs. EA" conflict, not "rationalists vs. EA" conflict. He expresses frustration at the rationalists to a substantial degree as well, and my inner Eliezer would not say things like "rationalists vs. EAs". Of course, there is still a bunch of mindkilly group dynamics that happen when you circle out the people you are disagreeing with as a unified group, but it does seem less bad. I do also still wish Eliezer did it less. Holden does similar things as well and also doesn't trigger me the same way, because while he often talks about the "doomers" or the "rationalists" or the "EAs" he tends to do it as an individual without claiming identity from a second tribe, and this makes the dynamics less bad. ### Comment by [ChristianKl](/users/christiankl) * 2026-09-10 20:54:19Z * Karma: 4 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/egz2FJk43QdNShajS](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/egz2FJk43QdNShajS) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/egz2FJk43QdNShajS](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/egz2FJk43QdNShajS) What exactly is the Safety and Security Committee doing and how much power does it have? Can the board employ safety researchers that work for the nonprofit and that aren't employees of the for profit? ### Comment by [ryan_greenblatt](/users/ryan_greenblatt) * 2026-09-10 14:19:07Z * Karma: 4 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 3 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/mN8EspmiFfZDoBpbi](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/mN8EspmiFfZDoBpbi) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/vf8KKNRhoLBbvPysd](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/vf8KKNRhoLBbvPysd) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/vf8KKNRhoLBbvPysd](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/vf8KKNRhoLBbvPysd) (TBC, I was just saying this paragraph provides relevant context.) ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-10 00:28:04Z * Karma: 4 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 8 * Total votes: 8 * Reply depth: 3 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WarGyzwcy9YuN3n7F](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/WarGyzwcy9YuN3n7F) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/szDsMHt5XarFzvREu](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/szDsMHt5XarFzvREu) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/szDsMHt5XarFzvREu](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/szDsMHt5XarFzvREu) Reactions (whole comment): * disagree: 1 I guess that's true, but it still seems pretty sketchy to me. I think the basic idea is that if he said things that caused the stock to fall, then they could sue him for damages? That sure sounds like there's someone around the senior levels of govt who you believe should be able to give you an insider take (and honest take) on OpenAI but who has a strong financial incentive to keep tight lips. What's more, if someone tried to promote him to a senior role in government, he'd have to turn them down without being able to tell them why! "Why?" "Oh... I feel like I've been too close to industry..." "But I think that's an asset!" Or if he accepts a role in the OSTP with Jason Matheny (who had a senior role there and was historically tight with OpenPhil EAs)? He could easily end up in situations where he was unexpectedly asked to give public comment and wouldn't be able to tell anyone that his finances were at risk. ### Comment by [ryan_greenblatt](/users/ryan_greenblatt) * 2026-09-09 23:51:27Z * Karma: 4 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xfjRndPywxWdcMDAf](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/xfjRndPywxWdcMDAf) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Jo6BnqzJkDLfhpWSH](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Jo6BnqzJkDLfhpWSH) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Jo6BnqzJkDLfhpWSH](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Jo6BnqzJkDLfhpWSH) The SSC was established in early 2024 and [according to OpenAI is](https://openai.com/index/openai-board-forms-safety-and-security-committee/) "responsible for making recommendations to the full Board on critical safety and security decisions for OpenAI projects and operations." I'd guess it has various more specific roles, though I don't know if there is much public information about this. For instance, the preparedness framework says: > The Safety and Security Committee (SSC) of the OpenAI Board of Directors (Board) will be given visibility into processes, and can review decisions and otherwise require reports and information from OpenAI Leadership as necessary to fulfill the Board’s oversight role. Where necessary, the Board may reverse a decision and/or mandate a revised course of action. (This is of course not very specific about how this actually works organizationally and seems to basically be a specific case of making recommendations.) ### Comment by [Ben Pace](/users/benito) * 2026-09-09 19:45:59Z * Karma: 4 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 45 * Total votes: 45 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/pypsEFoDWQpwKtvGk](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/pypsEFoDWQpwKtvGk) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/fixbXRFvcicuEwGnm](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/fixbXRFvcicuEwGnm) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/fixbXRFvcicuEwGnm](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/fixbXRFvcicuEwGnm) > I made the tone in this post softer than I would have if I were not a director, Lol. Ah yes, finally, Paul Christiano is toning down his extremist rhetoric! ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-13 03:37:15Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/yNj4mTEcB94mFnZzY](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/yNj4mTEcB94mFnZzY) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/dhSDGhWmk6uxioytF](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/dhSDGhWmk6uxioytF) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/dhSDGhWmk6uxioytF](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/dhSDGhWmk6uxioytF) Reactions (whole comment): * thumbs-up: 1 > Wei Dai: "*you've repeatedly drawn a line between 'my people' (which I interpret as MIRI/rationalists/LWers/people who have absorbed the Sequences) and EAs, then criticizing EAs as a group*" ... Eliezer does not contradict him (so presumably grants the premise?) I think in this case Wei just did the thing that somewhat consistently makes the conversation go worse, though using a long unwieldy name like "MIRI/rationalists/LWers/people-who-have-absorbed-the-Sequences" helps a lot, since like, it's clear you are not doing thing where you are invoking the social judgement of a group (since the ambiguity diffuses much of that). For me the "I am riling up my social group against your social group"/"my social group has higher standing than your social group" is the thing that has the biggest effect size, and IDK, I don't get that sense from most things Eliezer writes. I get a lot of "I am better than you people" vibes, but that's just not remotely as threatening or destructive. Happy to leave it at that, my guess is we are both very busy. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-13 03:30:25Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ksnNdxQ8PRqZEPJ7G](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ksnNdxQ8PRqZEPJ7G) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/q2ALqaqpwpEztgxPq](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/q2ALqaqpwpEztgxPq) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/q2ALqaqpwpEztgxPq](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/q2ALqaqpwpEztgxPq) Reactions (whole comment): * thumbs-up: 1 Yes, sorry I was consistently here referring to non-disparagement agreement. I should have been clearer about this. I think limited non-disclosures are standard, and sometimes an issue, but it's IMO reasonable and common for people to sign a bunch of those (and some of them can be quite bad, but it's not categorically problematic the way a general non-disparagement agreement is). ### Comment by [Lukas Finnveden](/users/lukas-finnveden) * 2026-09-13 00:42:30Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/SzyQRgPJCSozRsQxB](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/SzyQRgPJCSozRsQxB) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/iJ5vA8BqDMx2ukrgZ](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/iJ5vA8BqDMx2ukrgZ) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/iJ5vA8BqDMx2ukrgZ](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/iJ5vA8BqDMx2ukrgZ) Your first two links are wrong. ### Comment by [Linch](/users/linch) * 2026-09-11 17:26:55Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Bs2SjL36uggdsBEBa](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Bs2SjL36uggdsBEBa) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/DMc9xK9coBJQnicbv](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/DMc9xK9coBJQnicbv) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/DMc9xK9coBJQnicbv](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/DMc9xK9coBJQnicbv) Thank you, I stand corrected! ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-10 17:00:35Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/R3oLXQ4RbuAF4Yaac](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/R3oLXQ4RbuAF4Yaac) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/6x8hQGudgF54Dg5sr](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/6x8hQGudgF54Dg5sr) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6x8hQGudgF54Dg5sr](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6x8hQGudgF54Dg5sr) Reactions (whole comment): * agree: 1 I don't think Ben is talking about subtribes here (and I am frustrated with this being the second time in recent history where you posted/reposted a thing that ends up reinforcing tribal boundaries in ways that IMO will predictably make conversations go worse). ### Comment by [Jacob_Hilton](/users/jacob_hilton) * 2026-09-10 06:04:36Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 4 * Total votes: 4 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6ptGCXsMJpDr7E5vR](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6ptGCXsMJpDr7E5vR) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/QxZhywmRgy5aRRGKE](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/QxZhywmRgy5aRRGKE) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/QxZhywmRgy5aRRGKE](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/QxZhywmRgy5aRRGKE) I don't think ChatGPT's response is well-summarized as mostly agreeing with Ben. It rates the claim that "Paul generally reassured the wider public about AI risk" (which is the closest claim to what Ryan was contesting, if I am interpreting "in public" correctly) as "Not established; there is substantial contrary evidence". ### Comment by [ryan_greenblatt](/users/ryan_greenblatt) * 2026-09-09 23:39:45Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/n54SMwdGkBerzbivn](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/n54SMwdGkBerzbivn) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/nNJaa64SextWLbFns](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/nNJaa64SextWLbFns) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/nNJaa64SextWLbFns](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/nNJaa64SextWLbFns) Reactions (whole comment): * agree: 1 FWIW, my understanding is that the SSC can intervene on internal deployment and certainly the non-profit board has the ability to do this. ### Comment by [drnickbone](/users/drnickbone) * 2026-09-09 23:17:57Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 6 * Total votes: 6 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/AeaJhYwhMx2vFSCAT](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/AeaJhYwhMx2vFSCAT) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/AeaJhYwhMx2vFSCAT](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/AeaJhYwhMx2vFSCAT) To what extent does this help us with a global development pause? ### Comment by [Linch](/users/linch) * 2026-09-09 20:29:48Z * Karma: 3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 4 * Total votes: 4 * Reply depth: 3 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/fPi8mYvxuLTGDYCcs](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/fPi8mYvxuLTGDYCcs) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/ftQMGhGHnvRj6nB6M](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/ftQMGhGHnvRj6nB6M) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ftQMGhGHnvRj6nB6M](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ftQMGhGHnvRj6nB6M) My understanding is that the board has the *de jure* formal power to delay releases but whether or not they have the *de facto* power to do so is unknown until tested. ### Comment by [David Matolcsi](/users/david-matolcsi) * 2026-09-13 07:56:36Z * Karma: 2 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 1 * Total votes: 1 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/7PbrY8hvhCtonLiua](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/7PbrY8hvhCtonLiua) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/eD9vFFSAajd6HmtDm](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/eD9vFFSAajd6HmtDm) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/eD9vFFSAajd6HmtDm](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/eD9vFFSAajd6HmtDm) Sorry, fixed. I think that pointing to one nebulous group as an outgroup is equally bad for increasing tribalism as pointing to two nebulous groups. (Bowing out of the discussion now.) ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-13 03:27:54Z * Karma: 2 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 1 * Total votes: 1 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/SzyQRgPJCSozRsQxB](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/SzyQRgPJCSozRsQxB) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/7PbrY8hvhCtonLiua](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/7PbrY8hvhCtonLiua) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/7PbrY8hvhCtonLiua](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/7PbrY8hvhCtonLiua) > Eliezer: [1](/api/post/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK?commentId=MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG) [2](/api/post/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK?commentId=MeW6zeTtBn7XNetHG) These first two link to Richard Ngo comments. For all of these, I am not seeing two tribes being carved out (or I wouldn't really know which tribe Richard is aligning himself with in the above, the "rationality community" seems off). I think that's just a pretty different situation, as I explained. To be clear, carving out one tribe is still often fraught, but just much less fraught than doing a "us vs. them" thing. For Ben's comment: I mean, that is a comment 6 levels deep into a discussion where that tribal distinction is a given. I do think Wei Dai did the thing I am annoyed at here when he introduced it that way, and maybe it would have been better for someone to object, but it seems tricky. ### Comment by [David Matolcsi](/users/david-matolcsi) * 2026-09-12 17:28:17Z * Karma: 2 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 1 * Total votes: 1 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Y6ft2wRKxtH6X3Gfi](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Y6ft2wRKxtH6X3Gfi) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/a7Pp9KkWqvJuLb48C](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/a7Pp9KkWqvJuLb48C) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/a7Pp9KkWqvJuLb48C](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/a7Pp9KkWqvJuLb48C) Reactions (whole comment): * thanks: 1 Sorry, I agree that Zach's comment in this context was not particularly productive. I was responding to the "I'm frustrated with this being the second time in recent history where you posted/reposted a thing that ends up reinforcing tribal boundaries" comment that I felt was trying to establish a general norm which is unevenly enforced. ### Comment by [Erich_Grunewald](/users/erich_grunewald) * 2026-09-12 12:05:30Z * Karma: 2 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 1 * Total votes: 1 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HXDCmsHizYSPCNnjZ](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HXDCmsHizYSPCNnjZ) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/ksnNdxQ8PRqZEPJ7G](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/ksnNdxQ8PRqZEPJ7G) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ksnNdxQ8PRqZEPJ7G](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/ksnNdxQ8PRqZEPJ7G) Hmm, I don't think being under an NDA is likely to bias a person at NIST; I think things like remaining contacts in the company or industry, or just having the mindset and culture of one who's worked in the industry, are much more likely to introduce bias. I think the effect of an NDA on bias is pretty insignificant by comparison. I think it's more plausible that being under an NDA would introduce skew in the person's analyses at NIST, though I don't really see how this would be that substantial relative to the counterfactual of not having worked in the industry in the first place. Like, I assume most of the skew would be in being unable to act on or report non-public information gained while working there, which someone who hasn't worked in the industry wouldn't have anyway. (ETA: Actually, I think the above is true for a non-disclosure agreement. But I don't think it's true for a non-disparagement agreement, where I think skew is a much larger issue. That's relevant given [this other comment](/api/post/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK?commentId=MHRqaWRPZu7xX8pC5).) ### Comment by [mattmacdermott](/users/mattmacdermott) * 2026-09-10 19:51:00Z * Karma: 2 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 1 * Total votes: 1 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/kXNPcjtiGvjrFBnR2](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/kXNPcjtiGvjrFBnR2) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/K4Di3DMzSxWqKAZDL](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/K4Di3DMzSxWqKAZDL) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/K4Di3DMzSxWqKAZDL](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/K4Di3DMzSxWqKAZDL) Yeah, I think I agree biting humour is fine, and I think it's not as-a-rule ambiguous. It's just in this case I actually wasn't sure how to interpret it. But it sounds like there's a correct interpretation (warm/humorous but resigned about an established gripe) such that if I'd read it correctly first time I wouldn't have objected. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-10 05:57:04Z * Karma: 2 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 1 * Total votes: 1 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/AqBBLH9zfKtBGdheA](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/AqBBLH9zfKtBGdheA) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/TXnKqTHDfxqDMkHJu](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/TXnKqTHDfxqDMkHJu) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/TXnKqTHDfxqDMkHJu](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/TXnKqTHDfxqDMkHJu) Yep, I am not particularly enthused with ChatGPT's understanding of the claims in this comment thread. ### Comment by [ryan_greenblatt](/users/ryan_greenblatt) * 2026-09-09 23:53:38Z * Karma: 2 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 3 * Total votes: 3 * Reply depth: 1 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/NSQRHsFgD83wWyE7F](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/NSQRHsFgD83wWyE7F) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/NPLPuSQB36HMAaJyd](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/NPLPuSQB36HMAaJyd) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/NPLPuSQB36HMAaJyd](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/NPLPuSQB36HMAaJyd) Relevant paragraph (emphasis mine): > The SSC has an important and challenging role in overseeing risk management at OpenAI, and I hope to help provide expertise and assistance in a critical moment. My joining is not an endorsement or criticism of OpenAI’s safety practices in particular; I hope that all frontier companies strengthen safety oversight and I am excited to work on this at OpenAI. **I believe that the rest of the world should judge OpenAI, and all AI developers, by externally verifiable behavior and results.** ### Comment by [Perhaps](/users/perhaps) * 2026-09-12 23:42:30Z * Karma: 1 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 1 * Total votes: 1 * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/g9eBjuhQp5LRqKLCZ](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/g9eBjuhQp5LRqKLCZ) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/g9eBjuhQp5LRqKLCZ](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/g9eBjuhQp5LRqKLCZ) Thank you for writing this, and posting it here. ### Comment by [roha](/users/roha) * 2026-09-11 22:18:18Z * Karma: 1 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 1 * Total votes: 1 * Reply depth: 5 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/tCsSGyeQDtjEganEc](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/tCsSGyeQDtjEganEc) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/3DZtKsugFw2RNBDHP](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/3DZtKsugFw2RNBDHP) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/3DZtKsugFw2RNBDHP](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/3DZtKsugFw2RNBDHP) Someone should inform Sam Altman about this. He'd be [genuinely embarrassed](https://x.com/sama/status/1791936857594581428) if he knew. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-10 15:47:04Z * Karma: 1 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 2 * Total votes: 2 * Reply depth: 6 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/QxZhywmRgy5aRRGKE](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/QxZhywmRgy5aRRGKE) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Rb8zem2zLmQZn3ELx](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/Rb8zem2zLmQZn3ELx) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Rb8zem2zLmQZn3ELx](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/Rb8zem2zLmQZn3ELx) I disagree. After talking more to ChatGPT it consistently (for reasons I don’t understand) interpret Ben as making a statement about whether Paul said things in contrast to Eliezer, then says that is true, and doesn’t give an answer on the thing they are actually talking about. It repeatedly says that it agrees with Ben, but it does seem surprisingly confused about what Ben said. ### Comment by [habryka](/users/habryka4) * 2026-09-10 00:21:33Z * Karma: -1 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 18 * Total votes: 18 * Reply depth: 4 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HrQCAkRWDDHeEEpKv](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/HrQCAkRWDDHeEEpKv) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/6ptGCXsMJpDr7E5vR](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/6ptGCXsMJpDr7E5vR) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6ptGCXsMJpDr7E5vR](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/6ptGCXsMJpDr7E5vR) > FWIW, I don't think Paul served a large role as an optimistic counterweight to those sounding the alarm, at least in public. FWIW, [ChatGPT mostly agrees with Ben here](https://chatgpt.com/share/6aa1f793-e3ac-83e8-a305-d4adf0da2308), saying the core claim is true and some of the broader claims are unestablished, and doesn't find strong evidence against it: > **My assessment: Paul probably did serve as a substantial public counterweight to Yudkowsky-style pessimism within the AI-safety community.** The stronger claim—that he substantially reassured the wider public, or that this was a leading cause of his career success—is not established. Ben’s characterization has a defensible core, but bundles together several different claims. (I don't feel like ChatGPT super understood the claims here, but I also didn't want to go and poke it and clarify because I've found that to avoid framing effects I usually get the best answers if I just paste a comment thread and don't leak bits on what answer I want to hear) ### Comment by [Zach Stein-Perlman](/users/zach-stein-perlman) * 2026-09-10 16:29:38Z * Karma: -3 * Voting system: namesAttachedReactions * Approval votes: 9 * Total votes: 9 * Reply depth: 3 * Parent comment (Markdown): [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/W2umt4oqhjL7npq9r) * HTML permalink: [/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/R3oLXQ4RbuAF4Yaac](/posts/82z6FvbYRdjYjqigK/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comment/R3oLXQ4RbuAF4Yaac) * Markdown permalink: [/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/R3oLXQ4RbuAF4Yaac](/api/post/personal-statement-on-joining-the-openai-nonprofit-board/comments/R3oLXQ4RbuAF4Yaac) I am annoyed by how you suggest that only your subtribe says what it believes. You know how it would be silly to say "One of the top 3 things that has made Eliezer's career has been writing a lot in public about this subject in a way that is rhetorically alarming"? I think your comment is similarly silly. ### Navigation * [Front page](https://www.lesswrong.com/api/home) * [Markdown API documentation](https://www.lesswrong.com/api/SKILL.md)