3 ms·

Ousting sama and gdb over something as petty as a simple strategy disagreement is totally unprofessional. sama got accused of serious misconduct. Even if he was

by gizmo 3y ago

Ousting sama and gdb over something as petty as a simple strategy disagreement is totally unprofessional. sama got accused of serious misconduct. Even if he was too eager to commercialize OpenAIs tech that doesn't come close to justifying this circus act.

Mistletoe 3y ago
Don’t you think it’s more likely you don’t know the whole story yet?
- chipgap98 3y ago
  It has basically been confirmed https://twitter.com/GaryMarcus/status/1725707548106580255 https://twitter.com/GaryMarcus/status/1725707548106580255
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    There is plenty of indications about the nature of the disagreement, but that doesn't tell you what conduct did or did not occur as factions (including the one whose leading members have been ousted) sought to win the dispute.
  - seattle_spring 3y ago
    Did you mean to link to a different tweet? I don’t see how what you linked “basically confirms” literally anything related to this. Can you spell it out for those of us that aren’t reading literally every rumor and gossip that’s popped up in the last 12 hours?
  - weare138 3y ago
    If the allegations concerning Sam are true then this could all be for damage control. It is in OpenAI's best interest that information isn't released to the public and it's in Sam's best interest to keep his mouth shut about it if the allegations are true. The timing and abruptness of everything is highly suspicious. Even Microsoft was out of the loop on this which again is very strange if this was just an issue over corporate strategy and vision.
jprete 3y ago
Strategy disagreements are absolutely central reasons to fire executives.
- KerrAvon 3y ago
  But you don’t accuse of them of lying on the way out because you have a strong disagreement. That’s a guaranteed ticket to a very expensive lawsuit. Either there’s more to it or the board is staffed by very naive people.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > But you don’t accuse of them of lying on the way out because you have a strong disagreement. You do if part of the way that they attempted to win the internal power struggle resulting from the disagreemtn was lying to the board to avoid having their actions which lacked majority support from being thwarted.
  - jprete 3y ago
    You’re right! I presume he materially misled them about lots of small product decisions, and the dev-day announcements were the last straw.
MVissers 3y ago
This is not petty, it’s the integral mission of the company, the reason it was founded, the reason it got investors and the reason that many of the most brilliant scientists in the world work there. They started as a non-profit ffs.
- brysonreece 3y ago
  And they still are. OpenAI consists of two parts; a non-profit entity which owns the IP, along with the obvious commercialization-focused subsidiary of the company. My question is: what was stopping both parties here from pursuing parallel paths? — have the non-profit/research oriented arm continue to focus on solving AGI, backed by the funds raised on from their LLM offerings? Were potential roadmaps really that divergent? I had always assumed this was their internal understanding up until now, since at least the introduction of ChatGPT subscriptions.
  - edgyquant 3y ago
    Because it really seems like the for profit side was building towards a Microsoft acquisition
dragonwriter 3y ago
> Ousting sama and gdb over something as petty as a simple strategy disagreement A fundamental inability to align on what, on a fundamental level, the mission set out in the charter of a 501(c)(3) charity means in real world terms is not "a simple strategy disagreement"; moreover, the existence of a factional dispute over that doesn't mean that there weren't serious specific conduct that occurred in the context of that dispute over goals.
- Sai_ 3y ago
  The board questioned his “candid”-ness. This was not a difference of opinion on strategy.
  - tremon 3y ago
    Unless the board perceived his actions to be more in line with a different strategy than communicated.
    - kristianc 3y ago
      Yes, but the “candid” part carries the additional implication that he lied to make them think that.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    Candidness is a behavior question, the stories about what has been summarized as a difference of strategy (which, IMO, underestimates the fundamental difference that is described) seem to be providing a context for what ia described as long-running internal tension that ultimately led to the firing, not whatever behavior may have been the proximate cause.

by gizmo 3y ago

Mistletoe 3y ago

Don’t you think it’s more likely you don’t know the whole story yet?

chipgap98 3y ago
It has basically been confirmed https://twitter.com/GaryMarcus/status/1725707548106580255 https://twitter.com/GaryMarcus/status/1725707548106580255
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  There is plenty of indications about the nature of the disagreement, but that doesn't tell you what conduct did or did not occur as factions (including the one whose leading members have been ousted) sought to win the dispute.
- seattle_spring 3y ago
  Did you mean to link to a different tweet? I don’t see how what you linked “basically confirms” literally anything related to this. Can you spell it out for those of us that aren’t reading literally every rumor and gossip that’s popped up in the last 12 hours?
- weare138 3y ago
  If the allegations concerning Sam are true then this could all be for damage control. It is in OpenAI's best interest that information isn't released to the public and it's in Sam's best interest to keep his mouth shut about it if the allegations are true. The timing and abruptness of everything is highly suspicious. Even Microsoft was out of the loop on this which again is very strange if this was just an issue over corporate strategy and vision.

jprete 3y ago

Strategy disagreements are absolutely central reasons to fire executives.

KerrAvon 3y ago
But you don’t accuse of them of lying on the way out because you have a strong disagreement. That’s a guaranteed ticket to a very expensive lawsuit. Either there’s more to it or the board is staffed by very naive people.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > But you don’t accuse of them of lying on the way out because you have a strong disagreement. You do if part of the way that they attempted to win the internal power struggle resulting from the disagreemtn was lying to the board to avoid having their actions which lacked majority support from being thwarted.
- jprete 3y ago
  You’re right! I presume he materially misled them about lots of small product decisions, and the dev-day announcements were the last straw.

MVissers 3y ago

This is not petty, it’s the integral mission of the company, the reason it was founded, the reason it got investors and the reason that many of the most brilliant scientists in the world work there. They started as a non-profit ffs.

brysonreece 3y ago
And they still are. OpenAI consists of two parts; a non-profit entity which owns the IP, along with the obvious commercialization-focused subsidiary of the company. My question is: what was stopping both parties here from pursuing parallel paths? — have the non-profit/research oriented arm continue to focus on solving AGI, backed by the funds raised on from their LLM offerings? Were potential roadmaps really that divergent? I had always assumed this was their internal understanding up until now, since at least the introduction of ChatGPT subscriptions.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  Because it really seems like the for profit side was building towards a Microsoft acquisition

dragonwriter 3y ago

> Ousting sama and gdb over something as petty as a simple strategy disagreement A fundamental inability to align on what, on a fundamental level, the mission set out in the charter of a 501(c)(3) charity means in real world terms is not "a simple strategy disagreement"; moreover, the existence of a factional dispute over that doesn't mean that there weren't serious specific conduct that occurred in the context of that dispute over goals.

Sai_ 3y ago
The board questioned his “candid”-ness. This was not a difference of opinion on strategy.
- tremon 3y ago
  Unless the board perceived his actions to be more in line with a different strategy than communicated.
  - kristianc 3y ago
    Yes, but the “candid” part carries the additional implication that he lied to make them think that.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  Candidness is a behavior question, the stories about what has been summarized as a difference of strategy (which, IMO, underestimates the fundamental difference that is described) seem to be providing a context for what ia described as long-running internal tension that ultimately led to the firing, not whatever behavior may have been the proximate cause.