> If OpenAI is going to build safe AI, they have to beat everyone else to the level of AI that needs to be made safe!

This is exactly the kind of arms race that the AI safety people have been warning about basically from the start.

Just saying, this does not fill me with confidence.

My theory is that OpenAI is trying to become the premiere research outfit in the field, with all of the power that affords.

If they can get there before the arms race dynamic becomes an actual problem, then they'll have succeeded in largely divesting the major players of their technological advantage (presumably Google and Facebook will still retain a massive advantage in terms of data).

When state-of-the-art AI research is open, it allows everyone to have a more accurate pulse on potentially dangerous advancements.

Isn't an arms race an apt comparison, though, particularly if we consider general AI (of superior intellect to us, not the basic toys we have now) to be an existential threat to humanity? Look at our other one: nuclear weapons. After all the political pandering is done, the people who actually decide how nuclear weapons are managed, what rules govern them, etc. ...Are the very countries who have that power.

Conceivably, the organizations or entities which decide what rules AI must follow may very likely be those which can create the technology. OpenAI is at least a couple years behind what, a dozen companies? If OpenAI wishes for a seat at that table, they have a lot of catching up to do.

Just realize it takes a couple seasons to get good. Don't quite after the first few shows.