In June 2024, current and former workers associated with OpenAI and Google DeepMind called on AI companies to protect employees who raise concerns about artificial-intelligence risks. Their open letter sought safeguards against retaliation for internal or public warnings and an end to non-disparagement requirements that could penalize departing employees for criticizing a company.
What did the letter ask AI companies to change?
The letter called for employees to be able to report concerns about AI risks inside their organizations and speak publicly without fear of retaliation. It also urged companies to stop requiring non-disparagement agreements that could discourage or punish criticism after an employee leaves.
These were requests made by the letter’s organizers and signatories. The letter itself does not establish that a particular safety failure occurred or determine whether any company’s existing protections were adequate.
Who signed the letter?
The Associated Press reported 13 signatories. Most were former OpenAI employees; two worked or had worked for Google DeepMind; and four were identified as anonymous current OpenAI employees. The AP separately reported support from Yoshua Bengio, Geoffrey Hinton and Stuart Russell. The reported signatories should not be treated as representative of AI workers generally.
#1 Best Overall
Why did organizers say protections were needed?
Former OpenAI engineer and organizer Daniel Ziegler told the AP that AI development was moving quickly and that workplace incentives could encourage companies to advance without sufficient caution. Former OpenAI employee and co-organizer Daniel Kokotajlo said he left because he had lost hope that OpenAI would act responsibly, particularly in its pursuit of artificial general intelligence. Those are the organizers’ views, not independently established findings about the companies.
What did OpenAI say?
OpenAI said employees had ways to raise concerns, including an anonymous integrity hotline. The company also said it was proud of its record and scientific approach to risk, and agreed that rigorous debate mattered. In its statement, OpenAI said: “We agree that rigorous debate is crucial given the significance of this technology and we’ll continue to engage with governments, civil society and other communities around the world.”
The AP report describes the company’s position; it does not assess whether the hotline was effective or whether employees felt safe using it.
What was reported about departure agreements?
The AP reported that recent criticism of OpenAI departure paperwork had led the company to release former employees from non-disparagement agreements. That account reflects the situation described in June 2024. It does not establish the terms or scope of every agreement, or their later status.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Rank #3
Did OpenAI or other AI companies adopt the requested protections?
The June 4, 2024 AP report documents the campaign and OpenAI’s response at that time. It does not establish whether OpenAI or other firms later adopted the letter’s requested protections, so no subsequent policy outcome can be inferred from that coverage.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
