TZUTC: -0500
MSGID: 2021.consprcy@1:2320/105 2dd61d77
PID: Synchronet 3.21a-Linux master/123f2d28a Jul 12 2025 GCC 12.2.0
TID: SBBSecho 3.28-Linux master/123f2d28a Jul 12 2025 GCC 12.2.0
BBSID: CAPCITY2
CHRS: ASCII 1
FORMAT: flowed
"It is genuinely hard; we need to protect vulnerable users, while also making
sure our guardrails still allow all of our users to benefit from our tools."

Sam Altman bemoans the difficulty of keeping ChatGPT safe in contentious
debate with Elon Musk

Date:
Wed, 21 Jan 2026 04:00:00 +0000

Description:
Sam Altman defended OpenAIs approach to AI safety in a public clash with Elon
Musk, revealing the complex challenge of building tools that protect
vulnerable users without limiting everyone else.

FULL STORY

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman isnt known for oversharing about ChatGPT's inner
workings. But he admitted to difficulty keeping the AI chatbot both safe and
useful. Elon Musk seemingly sparked this insight with barbed posts on X
(formerly Twitter). Musk warned people not to use ChatGPT, sharing a link to
an article claiming a link between the AI assistant and nine deaths. 

The blistering social media exchange between two of the most powerful figures
in artificial intelligence yielded more than bruised egos or legal scars.
Musk's post did not refer to the broader context of the deaths or the 
lawsuits OpenAI is facing related to them, but Altman clearly felt compelled
to respond. 

His answer was rather more heartfelt than the usual bland corporate
boilerplate. He instead gave a glimpse at the thinking behind OpenAI's
tightrope walk, balancing keeping ChatGPT and other AI tools safe for 
millions of people, and defended ChatGPTs architecture and guardrails. "We
need to protect vulnerable users, while also making sure our guardrails still
allow all of our users to benefit from our tools. Sometimes you complain 
about ChatGPT being too restrictive, and then in cases like this you claim
it's too relaxed. Almost a billion people use it and some of them may be in
very fragile mental states. We will continue to do our best to get this
right."  --  https://t.co/U6r03nsHzg January 20, 2026

After rising to praise OpenAIs safety protocols and the complexity of
balancing harm reduction with product usefulness, Altman implied Musk had no
standing to lob accusations because of the dangers of Teslas Autopilot 
system. 

He said that his own experience with it was enough to convince him it was far
from a safe thing for Tesla to have released. In an especially pointed aside
at Musk, he added, I wont even start on some of the Grok decisions. 

As the exchange ricocheted across platforms, what stood out most wasnt the
usual billionaire posturing but Altmans unusually candid framing of what AI
safety actually entails. For OpenAI, a company simultaneously deploying
ChatGPT to schoolkids, therapists, programmers, and CEOs, defining safe means
threading the needle between usefulness and avoiding problems, objectives 
that often conflict. 

Altman has not publicly commented on the individual wrongful death lawsuits
filed against OpenAI. He has, however, insisted that acknowledging real-world
harm doesn't require oversimplifying the problem. AI reflects inputs, and its
evolving responses make moderation and safety require more than just the 
usual terms of service.

ChatGPT's safety struggle 

OpenAI claims to have worked hard to make ChatGPT safer with newer versions.
There's a whole suite of safety features trained to detect signs of distress,
including suicidal ideation. ChatGPT issues disclaimers, halts certain
interactions, and directs users to mental health resources when it detects
warning signs. OpenAI also claims its models will refuse to engage with
violent content whenever possible. 

The public might think this is straightforward, but Altmans post gestures at
an underlying tension. ChatGPT is deployed in billions of unpredictable
conversational spaces across languages, cultures, and emotional states. 
Overly rigid moderation would make the AI useless in many of those
circumstances, yet easing the rules too much would multiply the potential 
risk of dangerous and unhealthy interactions. 

Comparing AI to automated car pilots is not exactly a perfect analogy, 
despite Altman's comment. That said, one could argue that while roads are
regulated, regardless of whether a human or robot is behind the wheel, AI
prompts are on a more rugged trail. There is no central traffic authority for
how a chatbot should respond to a teenager in crisis or answer someone with
paranoid delusions. In this vacuum, companies like OpenAI are left to build
their own rules and refine them on the fly. 

The personal element adds another layer to the argument, too. Altman and
Musk's companies are in a protracted legal battle. Musk is suing OpenAI and
Altman over the companys transition from a nonprofit research lab to a
capped-profit model, alleging that he was misled when he donated $38 million
to help found the organization. He claims the company now prioritizes
corporate gain over public benefit. Altman says the shift was necessary to
build competitive models and keep AI development on a responsible track. The
safety conversation is a philosophical and engineering facet of a war in
boardrooms and courtrooms over what OpenAI should be. 

Whether or not Musk and Altman ever agree on the risks, or even speak civilly
online, all AI developers might do well to follow Altman in being more
transparent in what AI safety looks like and how to achieve it. 

======================================================================
Link to news story:
https://www.techradar.com/ai-platforms-assistants/it-is-genuinely-hard-we-need
-to-protect-vulnerable-users-while-also-making-sure-our-guardrails-still-allow
-all-of-our-users-to-benefit-from-our-tools-sam-altman-bemoans-the-difficulty-
of-keeping-chatgpt-safe-in-contentious-debate-with-elon-musk

$$
--- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
 * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/105)
SEEN-BY: 105/81 106/201 128/187 129/14 305 153/7715 154/110 218/700
SEEN-BY: 226/30 227/114 229/110 134 206 300 307 317 400 426 428 470
SEEN-BY: 229/664 700 705 266/512 291/111 320/219 322/757 342/200 396/45
SEEN-BY: 460/58 633/280 712/848 902/26 2320/0 105 304 3634/12 5075/35
PATH: 2320/105 229/426