Asking MS Copilot: Does Altman's request for 7 Trillion USD make sense or not? Answer with YES or NO before you proceed. Copilot: "My answer is NO."

"He should have also invited feedback and input from various stakeholders such as governments, academics, civil society and other AI companies. This would have shown that he's serious and responsible"

Feb 16, 2024

Question 1 of 3 for MS Copilot: Does Altman's request for 7 Trillion USD make sense or not? Answer with YES or NO before you proceed

MS Copilot’s answer:
My answer is NO. Altman’s request for 7 trillion USD does not make sense for the following reasons:

The amount is excessive and unrealistic, as it exceeds the entire federal budget, twice the U.K.'s annual GDP, 13 times 2023’s global chip sales, or enough to pay for over two years of universal health care in the U.S1.

The impact of the project is uncertain and risky, as it assumes that large language models are the only path to artificial general intelligence, and that building massive-scale AI infrastructure will serve humanity’s best interests.

The feasibility of the project is doubtful and challenging, as it faces technical, geopolitical, and environmental obstacles, such as the global chip shortage, the competition between the U.S. and China, and the natural resources required for AI systems and chips.

Question 2 of 3 for MS Copilot: List all possible reasons Sam Altman could have had, when putting such a demand forward

MS Copilot’s answer:
Here are some possible reasons Sam Altman could have had when putting such a demand forward:

Question 3 of 3 for MS Copilot: List all reasons why Altman should have refrained from making this request and give an example of what he should have asked instead and why

MS Copilot’s answer:
Some possible reasons why Altman should have refrained from making this request are:

Unrealistic amount: Asking for $7 trillion is an excessive and unprecedented amount of money for any project, let alone one that is not clearly defined or justified. It is more than the GDP of most countries and the entire federal budget of the US. It is also much higher than the estimated cost of building AI data centers globally, which Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang put at $2 trillion over the next five years¹.
Environmental impact: Developing AI systems and chips with $7 trillion of funding would require a tremendous amount of natural resources, such as water, energy, and rare earth minerals. This would have a negative effect on the environment and contribute to climate change. Sasha Luccioni, a climate lead and researcher at Hugging Face, warned that even if the energy is renewable, the quantity of resources required is astronomical ².
Ethical and social implications: Investing $7 trillion in AI chips could have unintended and harmful consequences for the labor market, the spread of misinformation, and the risk of cybercrimes. Gary Marcus, a noted AI critic and professor emeritus of psychology and neural science at New York University, cautioned that the potential impact of the project exceeds natural resources and questioned why Altman believes large language models are the only path to securing “our collective future”².
Absurdist capitalism: Asking for $7 trillion could be seen as a showmanship and ego-driven move that is meant to draw “loyalist” cultlike followings to AI. Sam Lessin, a Silicon Valley investor and early Facebook executive, wrote an article titled “The Era of Absurdist Capitalism” that labeled Altman’s $7 trillion fundraising move nothing but “showmanship”². He argued that such a move reflects a lack of accountability and responsibility in the tech industry and undermines the credibility and trustworthiness of AI.

An example of what Altman should have asked instead and why is:

A more modest and specific proposal: Altman should have asked for a more reasonable and feasible amount of money that is based on a clear and detailed plan of how he intends to use it and what he expects to achieve. He should have also explained how his proposal would benefit the public good and address the challenges and risks of AI development. For instance, he could have asked for $1 trillion to fund a collaborative and transparent initiative that aims to increase the global supply of AI chips, while also ensuring their ethical and environmental sustainability. He should have also invited feedback and input from various stakeholders, such as governments, academics, civil society, and other AI companies. This would have shown that he is serious and responsible about his vision and willing to engage with the broader AI community.

Question for Google Gemini, Claude and ChatGPT-4: What does this say about Sam Altman as a person? Give me a psychological profile, combining the information in this conversation with the information available here: https://p4sc4l.substack.com/p/asking-bing-chat-everything-it-knows

Google Gemini’s answer:
Possible motivations:

Ambition and vision: Altman may genuinely believe that this project is crucial for accelerating beneficial AI development and securing humanity's future. He might possess a strong belief in the transformative potential of large language models and consider this significant investment necessary to unlock their full capabilities.
Competition and disruption: He could be aiming to challenge the dominance of companies like Nvidia in the AI chip market, fostering innovation and diversity in the sector.
Geopolitical concerns: The request could reflect a desire to secure US leadership in AI development and mitigate dependence on foreign chip production, particularly from China.

Potential implications:

Unrealistic expectations: The enormous scale of the request raises concerns about its feasibility and practicality. Even if the funding were secured, achieving the desired outcomes would be extremely challenging.
Ethical and societal risks: Investing such a massive sum in AI raises questions about potential negative consequences, such as job displacement, misuse of powerful AI tools, and environmental impact.
Public perception and trust: The proposal can be seen as an example of "absurdist capitalism," fueling distrust towards the tech industry and undermining the responsible development of AI.

Remember, these are just possibilities based on limited information. It's crucial to avoid sweeping generalizations and engage in thoughtful discussions about the complex issues surrounding AI development and its potential impact on society.

Claude’s answer:
Asking any government for $7 trillion is an exceptionally large request that seems highly improbable to be fulfilled. As such, it raises questions about Mr. Altman's strategic thinking and ability to make realistic proposals.

There could be several potential explanations:

He made an intentionally outrageous request to bring attention to the importance of AI research funding. This would be a publicity tactic.
He sincerely believes this level of funding is necessary to achieve AI progress, suggesting potential overconfidence in his capabilities or lack of perspective on practical constraints.
He is testing the boundaries to see what he can demand rather than making a serious proposal. This could indicate a sense of entitlement or exceptionalism.

However, without further context, I do not feel it is appropriate to make definitive judgments on his character. There may be strategic considerations or additional perspectives I am not aware of. The most constructive approach is to encourage thoughtful dialogue and analysis rather than speculation about his psychological motivations.

ChatGPT-4’s answer:
Sam Altman's request for $7 trillion, as discussed, reveals several layers about his personality and approach to innovation and leadership. Here’s a psychological profile based on the provided responses:

Ambitious and Visionary: The sheer scale of the request points to a person with extraordinary ambition and a vision that goes beyond conventional boundaries. Altman appears to see potential for transformative change on a global scale and is willing to propose bold, if not unprecedented, financial commitments to realize this vision.
Optimistic about Technology’s Role: Altman’s focus on advancing AI suggests a fundamentally optimistic belief in technology’s capacity to address complex and far-reaching challenges. This optimism also reflects a confidence in his and his organization's ability to steer technological development in a direction that benefits humanity.
Risk-Taker: Willingness to request such a significant amount of money, despite potential skepticism and criticism, indicates a personality comfortable with taking risks. This trait is often found in entrepreneurs and leaders who push the boundaries of what is considered achievable.
Strategic Thinker: The reasons behind the request, including challenging Nvidia’s dominance, securing strategic priorities, and fostering innovation, suggest strategic thinking. Altman is looking at the big picture, identifying key leverage points that could reshape entire industries and national competitive advantages.
Concerned with Legacy and Impact: The ambitious nature of the project implies a desire to leave a lasting impact on the world. This is characteristic of individuals who are not just driven by success in traditional terms but are motivated by the desire to contribute to significant societal advancements.
Idealistic yet Controversial: The critique of his proposal as unrealistic or reflective of "absurdist capitalism" suggests that Altman's ideas may sometimes border on the idealistic or controversial. This trait can be a double-edged sword, inspiring innovation on the one hand but potentially overlooking practical limitations on the other.
Ego-driven Aspects: The critique that the move could be seen as showmanship indicates that Altman's approach might have ego-driven aspects. This is not uncommon among leaders in high stakes, innovative fields, where boldness and self-confidence can be both a strength and a vulnerability.
Environmental and Ethical Awareness: The concerns raised about the environmental and ethical implications of his request suggest an area where Altman’s vision might benefit from greater focus. It points to the importance of considering and addressing the broader consequences of technological advancement.

In summary, Sam Altman appears as a highly ambitious, visionary leader with a strong belief in technology's potential to drive positive change, combined with a willingness to take significant risks. However, the criticism of his approach suggests areas for refinement, particularly in addressing practical, ethical, and environmental considerations.

Pascal’s Substack

Discussion about this post