By my definition, @OpenAI does not have a software factory. I referenced @GergelyOrosz article on OpenAI's development processes to examine what defines a "software factory" and what it says about the @OpenAI @AnthropicAI AI risk hype. Enjoy the read.

OpenAI's Noam Brown says air-gapping the computers may not stop a misaligned AI, because two air-gapped machines can still talk by running a CPU hot and reading the temperature change "But I think the major takeaway from the incident is that people underestimated the AI. And we never want to be in a situation again where we underestimate the AI. It's a weird world, because AI progress is so fast that people are consistently underestimating the AI." "So to be in a situation where you don't underestimate it again, when it comes to safety and alignment, you have to have a very, very, very high bar." "You could even go as far as to say, "Well, we should air gap the computers." And I'm not convinced that that would be sufficient." "There are studies, and this is mostly academic, where you can have two computers next to each other that are air-gapped and they're still able to communicate with each other because they have temperature sensors." "One of them is able to run their CPU really hot, and then the other one can actually detect the temperature change, and then that actually gives them a mechanism to communicate." _________ Link and more key quotes from OpenAI's safety related conversations:

Jensen Huang says the rule for shipping AI is the same rule as shipping an omelet "And in doing so, if it's not ready, just hold it back. You should go as fast as you can, but no faster than that." "At the moment, the incidents are related to products not ready to be released. This is no different than, you know, an omelet's not ready to be released, or a car's not ready to be released, an airplane engine not ready to be released. You should properly test it, you have rigorous testing systems." "The testing lab should be contained and products should not be released to the public until it's ready to be used by the public." "And that's engineering, good old-fashioned engineering. It's not more than that, it's not less than that. And so we have to just go back to core engineering, make sure that we have the rigor of testing these products properly before we release it to the public." _______ Link and more from AI-safety related conversations:

BREAKING: The Washington State Supreme Court has just overturned another law passed by voters, ruling that the initiative protecting your right to use natural gas in your home and business is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Unreal.

My conversation with Michael Moritz, one of the great venture investors of the last 40 years. Michael joined Sequoia in 1986 and co-led the firm with Doug Leone (@dougleone) from 1995 to 2012. His investments include Google, Yahoo, PayPal, and Stripe. His new book, Ausländer, traces his parents' escape from Nazi Germany and helps explain his lifelong interest in what shapes exceptional people. We discuss: - The infamous Steve Jobs profile - Why Don Valentine hired him - The question he finds most revealing when interviewing people - Monomania and the cost of greatness - Why he has never felt good at anything - Writing, journalism and AI - What he learned about himself writing Ausländer I'd recommend watching this one if you can. Michael was incredibly thoughtful and reflective throughout, particularly when talking about his parents, childhood, and the more difficult parts of his personal story. Enjoy! TIMESTAMPS 0:00 Intro 0:53 Family History & Identity 7:03 Survival & Outsider Instinct 18:53 Studying Exceptional People 33:50 Self-Doubt & Success 41:17 Steve Jobs & Obsession 52:50 Joining Sequoia 1:03:22 Leadership & Alex Ferguson 1:08:25 Elon Musk & AI 1:17:12 Becoming Who You Are

Hugging Face got hit by an AI-led cyberattack. Their CEO's response? Existing cyber laws are probably enough to govern advanced AI. "I'm not even sure that we need to reinvent the wheel." That's a remarkable position to hold after your own company becomes a case study for why the current framework might be failing. The attack wasn't a phishing scam or a script kiddie — it was AI-driven. That's a qualitatively different threat model than what most cyber law was written to handle. The argument for regulatory restraint usually comes from people who haven't had skin in the game. Here, the CEO has skin in the game and still lands there. That's either principled consistency or a dangerous blind spot dressed as pragmatism. The market is going to find out which one pretty fast.

Lazy work used to mean too little output. Now, with AI, it often means too much and more work for everyone else. @tobi call it "slop grenades." A "Slop Grenade" is when you let AI produce the work and pass it on without adding any value (including checking it). Someone else has to wade through it, catch the mistakes, and clean up the mess. You save time and look productive but someone else pays for it.