We haven't heard the end of it yet.

我們還沒聽完呢。

Yes, Sam Altman is back as the undisputed leader, his detractors in the board have been removed.

是的，薩姆-奧特曼重新成為無可爭議的領導者，董事會中詆譭他的人已經被清除。

But the drama is not quite over.

但是，戲劇還沒有完全結束。

The story has shifted to something called Q star.

故事轉向了一種叫做 Q 星的東西。

It's a project that open A I was working on qar some latest reports have hinted at this.

一些最新報道暗示了這一點。

They speak about a leap, a breakthrough of sorts, but this breakthrough was said to be alarming and concerns were raised internally.

他們說的是一種飛躍，一種突破，但這種突破據說是令人震驚的，引起了內部的擔憂。

Some people working on QTAR reached out to the company's board.

一些在 QTAR 工作的人聯繫了公司董事會。

They spoke about the dangers of artificial intelligence and what they were making.

他們談到了人工智能的危險以及他們正在做的事情。

They thought it was dangerous.

他們認為這很危險。

And soon after that, Sam Altman was fired.

之後不久，薩姆-奧特曼就被解僱了。

So was this a coincidence or the final straw?

那麼，這是巧合還是最後一根稻草？

And what really is this Q Star project?

Q Star 項目到底是什麼？

Is it dangerous?

危險嗎？

Is it something that the world should know about?

世界應該知道這件事嗎？

Here's what we've been able to gather reports say Q star could be a breakthrough.

以下是我們所能收集到的資訊，報道稱 Q 星可能是一個突破。

It may lead to the development of artificial general intelligence, A G artificial General intelligence.

它可能導致人工通用智能（A G artificial General Intelligence）的發展。

So how is A G different from A I?

那麼，A G 與 A I 有什麼不同呢？

It's about what these models can do?

這是關於這些模型能做什麼？

Let's first look at normal A IA I chat bots like chat GPT.

讓我們先看看普通的 A IA I 哈拉機器人，如哈拉 GPT。

They work on language.

他們在語言方面下功夫。

They'll type something out for you.

他們會幫你打出來。

They'll translate a text and they do this by using statistical predictions in simpler terms.

他們會翻譯文本，用更簡單的術語來說，就是通過統計預測來完成翻譯。

These are educated guesses.

這些都是有根據的猜測。

A I chat bots make these guesses.

我的哈拉機器人會做出這些猜測。

After going through billions of pieces of text, they generate what they think is the right answer.

在閱讀了數十億篇文章後，他們會生成自己認為正確的答案。

But because they're constantly getting trained, that answer can also change, which is why these chat bots can give different responses to the same prompt.

但是，由於它們不斷接受培訓，答案也會發生變化，這就是為什麼這些哈拉機器人會對相同的提示給出不同的回覆。

You must have seen this.

你一定看過這個。

It's all basically very good guess work.

這基本上都是很好的猜測。

And that's A I for you artificial intelligence.

這就是人工智能的 A I。

But that won't be the case with A G I artificial General intelligence because A G I focuses on facts and not guess work even initial A G I projects like QTAR, they work on mathematical problems, things that can have only one answer.

但 A G I 人工智能不會是這種情況，因為 A G I 專注於事實，而不是猜測，即使是像 QTAR 這樣的初始 A G I 項目，它們也是在研究數學問題，研究只有一個答案的事情。

Now A G is still work in progress.

現在，A G 仍在進行中。

If and when it is perfected, we may have something close to real intelligence and reports say this is already happening.

如果它得到完善，我們就可能擁有接近真實情報的東西，有報道稱這種情況已經出現。

The qar project is allegedly solving basic math problems, junior school level sums.

qar 項目據稱是解決基礎數學問題，即國中水準的總和。

And that's just the first step.

這只是第一步。

These programs will only become smarter with time and if unchecked more dangerous with time, apparently, Sam Altman was pushing this project.

隨著時間的推移，這些程序只會變得越來越聰明，如果不加以控制，就會越來越危險，顯然，薩姆-奧特曼正在推動這個項目。

It may have something to do with his ouster reports, say it was adding to existing existing grievances, but we cannot confirm any of this right now, these are just whispers from unnamed sources.

這可能與他下臺的報道有關，說這是雪上加霜，但我們現在無法證實這些，這些只是不具名消息人士的耳語。

What we know for sure is this the open A I board thought that Sam Altman was not always honest when they sacked him, they released a statement, we told you about it when he was sacked that this is what the statement said.

我們可以肯定的是，公開 A I 董事會在解僱薩姆-奧特曼時認為他並不總是誠實，他們發表了一份聲明，我們在他被解僱時就告訴過你們，聲明是這樣說的。

Let me read it out for you.

讓我讀給你聽。

Mr Altman's departure follows a deliberative review process by the board which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities.

董事會在對 Altman 先生的離職進行審議後認為，Altman 先生在與董事會的溝通中未能始終保持坦誠，妨礙了董事會履行職責的能力。

This is what the board statement said.

這是董事會的聲明。

It's a vague justification.

這是一個模糊的理由。

No specifics.

沒有具體說明。

The board said he was not consistently candid in his communications, meaning he may have been hiding things, but they're talking about the dangers of Q star.

董事會說，他在交流中並不一貫坦誠，這意味著他可能隱瞞了一些事情，但他們正在談論 Q 星的危險性。

We don't know.

我們不知道。

The board also said that Sam Altman was hindering their work.

董事會還說，薩姆-奧特曼妨礙了他們的工作。

But what exactly are the responsibilities of this board?

但是，這個委員會的職責到底是什麼呢？

Here's what the company says.

公司是這麼說的

The goal is and I'm quoting building safe and beneficial artificial general intelligence for the benefit of humanity, not profits, not innovation, safety and benefiting humanity.

我引述的目標是，建設安全有益的人工通用智能，造福人類，而不是利潤，不是創新，而是安全和造福人類。

Open A I claims to be a different type of company, which is why the board had someone like Helen Toner as a member, the one who became the arch nemesis of Sam Altman, she's now being removed as he returns.

Open A I 聲稱自己是一家與眾不同的公司，這就是為什麼董事會會有像海倫-託納這樣的成員，她是薩姆-奧特曼的死對頭，現在隨著奧特曼的迴歸，她也被撤職了。

Toner is the Director of Strategy at Georgetown Center for Security and Emerging Technology.

託納是喬治敦安全與新興技術中心的戰略總監。

This is an institute that analyzes the security implications of emerging technologies.

這是一個分析新興技術安全影響的機構。

The director of Strategy was on the OPEN A I board and she was reportedly a thorn in Sam Altman's side.

戰略總監是 OPEN A I 董事會成員，據說她是薩姆-奧特曼的眼中釘。

She was among the members who wanted him gone.

她也是希望他離開的成員之一。

But as things stand, she is the one who's out the entire saga seems murky.

但從目前的情況來看，她是整個事件的始作俑者，這讓整個事件顯得撲朔迷離。

Hopefully we'll get some clarification soon.

希望我們能儘快得到澄清。