You're right, fixed, thanks!

In response, some companies began listing warrant canaries on their websites—sentences stating that they had never yet been forced to reveal any client data. If at some point they did receive such a warrant, they could then remove the canary without violating their legal non-disclosure obligation, thereby allowing the public to gain indirect evidence about this otherwise-invisible surveillance.

 

Can the gov force them not to remove the canary?

It wasn't me but it's probably about spreading AI capabilities-relevant knowledge.

He openly stated that he had left OA because he lost confidence that they would manage singularity responsibly. Had he signed the NDA, he would be prohibited from saying that.

from Eric Weinstein in a youtube video.

Can you link?

Note to the LW team: it might be worth considering making links to AI Safety Info live-previewable (like links to other LW posts/sequences/comments and Arbital pages), depending on how much effort it would take and how much linking to AISI on LW we expect in the future.

I find it hard to imagine a job offer that Jan Leike judged more attractive than OA superalignment. (unless he made an update similar to Kokotajlo's or something?)

Yeah, that meme did reach me. But I was just assuming Ilya got back (was told to get back) to doing the usual Ilya superalignment things and decided (was told) not to stick his neck out.

After returning to OpenAI just five days after he was ousted, Mr. Altman reasserted his control and continued its push toward increasingly powerful technologies that worried some of his critics. Dr. Sutskever remained an OpenAI employee, but he never returned to work.

Had this been known until now? I didn't know he "didn't get back to work" although admittedly I wasn't tracking the issue very closely.