Edward Snowden wrote on social media to his nearly 6 million followers, “Do not ever trust @OpenAI … You have been warned,” following the appointment of retired U.S. Army General Paul Nakasone to the board of the artificial intelligence technology company.

Snowden, a former National Security Agency (NSA) subcontractor, was charged with espionage by the Justice Department in 2013 after leaking thousands of top-secret records, exposing the agency’s surveillance of private citizens’ information.

In a Friday morning post on X, formerly Twitter, Snowden reshared a post providing information on OpenAI’s newest board member. Nakasone is a former NSA director, and the longest-serving leader of the U.S. Cyber Command and chief of the Central Security Service. He retired from the NSA, a position he held since 2018, in February.

Snowden wrote in an X post, “They’ve gone full mask-off: do not ever trust @OpenAI or its products (ChatGPT etc.) There is only one reason for appointing an @NSAGov Director to your board. This is a willful, calculated betrayal of the rights of every person on Earth.” He concluded the post, writing, “You have been warned.”

  • sunzu
    link
    fedilink
    775 months ago

    Strong down vote ratio…

    Can’t tell if “AI” bros or the spooks are butthurt today.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      655 months ago

      There are a significant number of people who also really hate Snowden for various reasons (he’s a traitor, he ran to Russia, etc.) and don’t care whether or not he’s making a good point.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        455 months ago

        He didn’t really choose Russia, it was the only country that would protect him from rendition.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          285 months ago

          Not even that. He was headed to Cuba, the US government forced him to be in Russia.

          “NSA leaker Edward Snowden got stuck at a Moscow airport after Cuba, feeling pressure from Washington, warned that it would not allow an Aeroflot flight from Russia to land in Havana if he were aboard”

        • Flying Squid
          link
          115 months ago

          I’m not justifying their reasons, I’m just explaining that’s what some of them say.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -9
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Maybe at first it was a lack of options, but he’s absolutely become a Russian asset since then. Doesn’t mean he’s wrong about OpenAI, but still.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            18
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Would love some sources for that claim, if it isn’t just conjecture.

            Edit: Nice to be downvoted for not taking everything at face value and questioning people’s claims.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            125 months ago

            He’s a Russian PR win, but I haven’t seen him be especially pro-Putin or anything.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              45 months ago

              He’s not overtly pro-putin, but he did accept Russian citizenship and was denying the possibility of Ukraine being invaded until like literally the day before the invasion started, which was long after it was obvious Russia was planning to invade.

              • @yamanii
                link
                45 months ago

                It’s as if the dude is protecting his life or something, maybe if the US didn’t want to basically kill him for exposing PRISM to the world.

              • Flying Squid
                link
                45 months ago

                He accepted Russian citizenship for his own safety so he could never be extradited to the U.S. and yeah, I’m not shocked he didn’t do something that would come with a big risk in Russia.

                So neither of those really work as accusations.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  05 months ago

                  He accepted Russian citizenship for his own safety so he could never be extradited to the U.S

                  He got Russian citizenship less than 2 years ago. Why was extradition suddenly a concern when it wasn’t for the previous near decade he had lived there without citizenship?

                  yeah, I’m not shocked he didn’t do something that would come with a big risk in Russia.

                  That’s the thing, he didn’t need to do anything. He could’ve just not said anything at all, but instead he was outright claiming the idea of Russia invading Ukraine was nothing but US propaganda up until like literally a day(iirc) before the invasion actually started.

                  You could argue he’s only acting as a Russian asset for his own safety, but he’s still acting as a Russian asset.

      • BezzelBob
        link
        25 months ago

        I always find it hilarious for the reasons people hate snowden, like I’m sure it’s pretty well known by know that he didn’t choose Russia, the US forced him to become stuck there when they voided his passport, also idk how they consider revealing illegal crimes against the people as being a trader

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      125 months ago

      Alternate explanation, from the normies: it’s a purely speculative claim with minimal argument.

      • @MotoAsh
        link
        45 months ago

        Yes, a speculative claim … from someone who absolutely knows what the fuck they’re talking about.

        • @chonglibloodsport
          link
          -45 months ago

          That’s not good enough. There are countless cases throughout history of professors, scientists, and other public authority figures who have made well-reasoned, well-supported and argued claims and also made completely unsubstantiated rubbish claims.

          This is an unsubstantiated appeal to authority. Snowden is saying “trust me” but refusing to elaborate. Well, sorry, but no.

          OpenAI hiring a former NSA director raises a lot of questions and we in the public have the right to demand answers. If OpenAI refuses to answer or is otherwise evasive about their motives then we have genuine reason to be suspicious.

          I think overall we should treat ALL cloud service providers with the same degree of suspicion, regardless of who they hire. They are handling our personal data which is a serious responsibility that should not be betrayed.

          However, I think there is a legitimate reason for OpenAI making this hire: they want to market their language models as a tool for automated signals intelligence analysis. Hiring a former NSA director puts them on a fast track to getting the opportunities and intelligence community contacts they seek.

          • @MotoAsh
            link
            85 months ago

            It is ABSOLUTELY good enough when the question is about TRUST.

            He’s not making positive claims that specific things will happen. He’s saying don’t trust putting a wolf in charge of the hen house.

            The fact you do not understand this basic tenant of life is frankly pathetic.

            • @chonglibloodsport
              link
              15 months ago

              And I’m saying you shouldn’t be trusting any of these cloud providers implicitly, regardless of who they hire. A company needs to demonstrate trustworthiness first. Starting off from a position of trust is foolish.

              • @MotoAsh
                link
                25 months ago

                Yes, it should start at not trusting them, but this move distinctly and specifically means they are EVEN LESS trustworthy.

      • sunzu
        link
        fedilink
        35 months ago

        There is deff speculative element to it. We dont have view of the inner workings and unlikely to see it besides bread crumbs that get leaked over years and astroturfed by the fake news.

        People still relying on propaganda networks do have weird idea that they knows what’s up… I guess it is easier to be simping for dudes in power after all. Makes you sleep better at night.

    • Lee Duna
      link
      fedilink
      English
      55 months ago

      I guess someone here said that Snowden is behind the times and his comments are not relevant? And try to downplaying something bigger that Snowden might suggest.

    • swayevenly
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 months ago

      the spooks are butthurt today.

      Are you from the UK?

        • swayevenly
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Was looking up if that word meant something else and the first result was a British show called Spooks. My mom used to watch it but I didn’t recognize it because it was called MI-5 in North America since spook is a racial slur. Atleast it is in the US.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            4
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            I have never heard anyone say that as a racial slur and I grew up with a bunch of racists. Historically it was, at least in some parts of the u.s.

            I love William Gibson’s ‘Spook Country’ from 2007. I don’t remember any controversy about the title then.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spook_Country

            • sunzu
              link
              fedilink
              15 months ago

              spook as in undesirable government creep?

              because that title alone can be interpenetrated so many different ways without context

              PS i checked the wiki but now that i know the other meaning, i likely explains some of the weird takes i got in the past.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                25 months ago

                I always knew of spook as a racial slur, but never heard it used that way. Spook was always used as a government intelligence officer, like CIA , FBI , NSA , MI6.

            • @grue
              link
              English
              -15 months ago

              I have never heard anyone say that as a racial slur and I grew up with a bunch of racists. Historically it was, at least in some parts of the u.s.

              I’ve only heard it once, in Back to the Future:

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_Hb-PhNLT0

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            15 months ago

            Spook is a term for intelligence agents. It is not a racial slur. Whoever you know that used it as a slur made it a slur by themselves.

            An easy way to see it’s not a racial slur in America is it’s use in culture, such as the X-Files.

          • sunzu
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Citation to the most authoritative source on the net: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spook.

            spooks

            1. Government intelligence agents, see G-men.

            2. Anyone involved in espionage.

            3. Careful on this phone line, there could be spooks listening in.

            4. I heard this place was crawling with spooks, some kind of weapon of mass destruction is being sold or something. by Alan May 9, 2004

    • @aesthelete
      link
      -2
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      There is a surprisingly large amount of bot humpers on this site.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -45 months ago

      I would downvote simply because this type of community, “fuck whatever” exists solely as an echo chamber of internet hate train and is unlikely to ever produce anything of value.

      I would claim that it’s better to downvote to prevent other people from finding extremely biased posts from a one sided community such as this. There is no arguing in good faith here, only tribalism.