When OpenAI’s new video app Sora first came out, it had an incredibly lax copyright policy. Unless media companies choose not to, their characters could be remixed, voiced, and reenacted without any problems. That led to “Nazi SpongeBob,” “criminal Pikachu,” and scenes where Rick and Morty gave speeches.
After a big fuss on social media, Sam Altman took a big step back. But this isn’t just a bug; it’s the latest example of how OpenAI builds things first and then asks questions later. Who decided that society should be its test subject?
Ethics as Afterthought: The Sora Shock
Sam Altman said he “didn’t expect” people to be so angry about how their likenesses were used. But this kind of excuse reminds us of errors OpenAI has made in the past.
People have complained many times about ChatGPT because it spreads false information. One study found that it agreed with false statements 25% of the time.
With DALL·E, users called out racism and unflattering portrayals of people of color and women. Now, users are already generating sexual and offensive videos with Sora, even though there are guardrails in place.
As usual for OpenAI, they release new technology quickly, deal with the backlash, and then soft-pivot. People are used as test subjects in that “build fast, punish later” model. In the end, if you can shock people first and then say sorry, the headlines are more important than the fixes.
Too Little, Too Late: Backtracking Doesn’t Cut It
When the outrage reached its peak, OpenAI promised “more granular controls” and said that rights holders would decide which characters are allowed. But these fixes are meant to be reactive.
Why didn’t these controls start out on day one? Then why put out a tool that lets people write controversial dialogue in someone else’s voice and call it “iteration”?
This trend is the same across OpenAI’s roadmap. Altman even framed the Sora mess as a lesson for society: they’ll “use this window to get society to really understand … we can generate almost indistinguishable videos.” But who chose Altman to be in charge of the test? Using the anger of the public as a feedback loop is not an excuse for not having moral insight.
Read Next: Trump’s ‘Grim Reaper’ Will Come Back to Haunt Him