Sam Altman

Not crush. We have to be ahead and then we have to be as willing to work together as possible. And I think that is somewhat similar to peace through strength. It's like if there's an arms race, we'll win it, but we don't want to. We want to do this in a way that everybody benefits.

Not crush. We have to be ahead and then we have to be as willing to work together as possible. And I think that is somewhat similar to peace through strength. It's like if there's an arms race, we'll win it, but we don't want to. We want to do this in a way that everybody benefits.

Not crush. We have to be ahead and then we have to be as willing to work together as possible. And I think that is somewhat similar to peace through strength. It's like if there's an arms race, we'll win it, but we don't want to. We want to do this in a way that everybody benefits.

Yeah. But it's here. It's not even that. It's more like if there's any path towards doing this as a collaborative effort, we should, but we can't control what other entities do.

Yeah. But it's here. It's not even that. It's more like if there's any path towards doing this as a collaborative effort, we should, but we can't control what other entities do.

Yeah. But it's here. It's not even that. It's more like if there's any path towards doing this as a collaborative effort, we should, but we can't control what other entities do.

Yeah. We collaborate with China. Yeah, actually, I'll say that directly. I think we collaborate with people we don't get along with all the time in areas where it's in our strategic interest to do so. And this is one where I think the interests of the world and certainly the mission of our company would dictate that if it is possible to be truly collaborative, we should do that.

Yeah. We collaborate with China. Yeah, actually, I'll say that directly. I think we collaborate with people we don't get along with all the time in areas where it's in our strategic interest to do so. And this is one where I think the interests of the world and certainly the mission of our company would dictate that if it is possible to be truly collaborative, we should do that.

Yeah. We collaborate with China. Yeah, actually, I'll say that directly. I think we collaborate with people we don't get along with all the time in areas where it's in our strategic interest to do so. And this is one where I think the interests of the world and certainly the mission of our company would dictate that if it is possible to be truly collaborative, we should do that.

I was going to say, you might know more than I. Like, that will be a big question for the new administration. But that's not going to happen at the company-to-company level. That's going to happen, like, the presidents of the two countries level.

I was going to say, you might know more than I. Like, that will be a big question for the new administration. But that's not going to happen at the company-to-company level. That's going to happen, like, the presidents of the two countries level.

I was going to say, you might know more than I. Like, that will be a big question for the new administration. But that's not going to happen at the company-to-company level. That's going to happen, like, the presidents of the two countries level.

U.S. infrastructure and supply chain. Build our own chips here, build enough energy to run data centers here, change what it takes to build data centers here, but be able to build the very expensive complex supply chain, very expensive infrastructure in the United States. That's the first thing I would do.

U.S. infrastructure and supply chain. Build our own chips here, build enough energy to run data centers here, change what it takes to build data centers here, but be able to build the very expensive complex supply chain, very expensive infrastructure in the United States. That's the first thing I would do.

U.S. infrastructure and supply chain. Build our own chips here, build enough energy to run data centers here, change what it takes to build data centers here, but be able to build the very expensive complex supply chain, very expensive infrastructure in the United States. That's the first thing I would do.

I think there are two things that matter. One is... what flexibility a user has to get the system to behave the way they want. And I think, or we think, there should be very wide bounds. There are some things like you don't want a system to tell you how to create nuclear weapons. Fine, we can all agree on that.

I think there are two things that matter. One is... what flexibility a user has to get the system to behave the way they want. And I think, or we think, there should be very wide bounds. There are some things like you don't want a system to tell you how to create nuclear weapons. Fine, we can all agree on that.

I think there are two things that matter. One is... what flexibility a user has to get the system to behave the way they want. And I think, or we think, there should be very wide bounds. There are some things like you don't want a system to tell you how to create nuclear weapons. Fine, we can all agree on that.

But if you want a system to be pretty offensive and you ask it to be, I think part of alignment is doing what its user asks for within these broad bounds that society agrees on. The second thing that really matters is what the defaults are. So if you don't do any of that, which most users don't, And you ask whatever controversial question you want, how should the system respond?

But if you want a system to be pretty offensive and you ask it to be, I think part of alignment is doing what its user asks for within these broad bounds that society agrees on. The second thing that really matters is what the defaults are. So if you don't do any of that, which most users don't, And you ask whatever controversial question you want, how should the system respond?