▲ 470 ▼ Sam Altman Crows That AI Is Now Smarter Than the Brightest Human Scientists: Sure, Sam. (futurism.com) submitted 1 week ago by eicker@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 132 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 24 points 6 days ago (6 children) Sam Altman has been credibly accused of raping his sister. ...not going anywhere with this, just felt compelled to share. permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 days ago (5 children) What makes it credible? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago (4 children) An under-oath deposition by the alleged victim in which she affirmed Altman sexually abused her starting when she was age 3 and lasting until she was age 12. There are also countless former associates of Altman who have gone on record stating that he's a compulsive liar and narcissist. That's obviously not direct evidence of anything, but it establishes a clear pattern of untrustworthy and potentially abusive behavior from Altman. The civil case was ultimately dismissed because the alleged victim refused to submit to an independent medical examination requested by the Judge... but such refusals are extremely common among people who have been traumatized by sexual abuse and don't want some stranger poking around their private parts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago (3 children) How do you define credible in this context? And how do you know that she and/or the former associates don't lie? Do you mean an medical examination years after the abuse happened? What is that supposed to accomplish? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] call_me_xale@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago (2 children) A victim giving a deposition under oath is considered a credible accusation on its face. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Seralth@piefed.seralth.com 0 points 6 days ago I've never understood how a oath somehow creates a form of credibility with out some other proof to back it up It's still just words. I know lying under oath is a crime and all that. But when most shit just gets settled and rarely actually has teeth towards the rich or famous. It feels like an oath is just a pretend make believe thing that only the deranged actually think is real. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago OK. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 days ago (5 children) What makes it credible? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago (4 children) An under-oath deposition by the alleged victim in which she affirmed Altman sexually abused her starting when she was age 3 and lasting until she was age 12. There are also countless former associates of Altman who have gone on record stating that he's a compulsive liar and narcissist. That's obviously not direct evidence of anything, but it establishes a clear pattern of untrustworthy and potentially abusive behavior from Altman. The civil case was ultimately dismissed because the alleged victim refused to submit to an independent medical examination requested by the Judge... but such refusals are extremely common among people who have been traumatized by sexual abuse and don't want some stranger poking around their private parts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago (3 children) How do you define credible in this context? And how do you know that she and/or the former associates don't lie? Do you mean an medical examination years after the abuse happened? What is that supposed to accomplish? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] call_me_xale@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago (2 children) A victim giving a deposition under oath is considered a credible accusation on its face. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Seralth@piefed.seralth.com 0 points 6 days ago I've never understood how a oath somehow creates a form of credibility with out some other proof to back it up It's still just words. I know lying under oath is a crime and all that. But when most shit just gets settled and rarely actually has teeth towards the rich or famous. It feels like an oath is just a pretend make believe thing that only the deranged actually think is real. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago OK. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago (4 children) An under-oath deposition by the alleged victim in which she affirmed Altman sexually abused her starting when she was age 3 and lasting until she was age 12. There are also countless former associates of Altman who have gone on record stating that he's a compulsive liar and narcissist. That's obviously not direct evidence of anything, but it establishes a clear pattern of untrustworthy and potentially abusive behavior from Altman. The civil case was ultimately dismissed because the alleged victim refused to submit to an independent medical examination requested by the Judge... but such refusals are extremely common among people who have been traumatized by sexual abuse and don't want some stranger poking around their private parts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago (3 children) How do you define credible in this context? And how do you know that she and/or the former associates don't lie? Do you mean an medical examination years after the abuse happened? What is that supposed to accomplish? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] call_me_xale@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago (2 children) A victim giving a deposition under oath is considered a credible accusation on its face. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Seralth@piefed.seralth.com 0 points 6 days ago I've never understood how a oath somehow creates a form of credibility with out some other proof to back it up It's still just words. I know lying under oath is a crime and all that. But when most shit just gets settled and rarely actually has teeth towards the rich or famous. It feels like an oath is just a pretend make believe thing that only the deranged actually think is real. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago OK. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago (3 children) How do you define credible in this context? And how do you know that she and/or the former associates don't lie? Do you mean an medical examination years after the abuse happened? What is that supposed to accomplish? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] call_me_xale@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago (2 children) A victim giving a deposition under oath is considered a credible accusation on its face. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Seralth@piefed.seralth.com 0 points 6 days ago I've never understood how a oath somehow creates a form of credibility with out some other proof to back it up It's still just words. I know lying under oath is a crime and all that. But when most shit just gets settled and rarely actually has teeth towards the rich or famous. It feels like an oath is just a pretend make believe thing that only the deranged actually think is real. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago OK. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] call_me_xale@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago (2 children) A victim giving a deposition under oath is considered a credible accusation on its face. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Seralth@piefed.seralth.com 0 points 6 days ago I've never understood how a oath somehow creates a form of credibility with out some other proof to back it up It's still just words. I know lying under oath is a crime and all that. But when most shit just gets settled and rarely actually has teeth towards the rich or famous. It feels like an oath is just a pretend make believe thing that only the deranged actually think is real. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago OK. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Seralth@piefed.seralth.com 0 points 6 days ago I've never understood how a oath somehow creates a form of credibility with out some other proof to back it up It's still just words. I know lying under oath is a crime and all that. But when most shit just gets settled and rarely actually has teeth towards the rich or famous. It feels like an oath is just a pretend make believe thing that only the deranged actually think is real. permalink fedilink source parent