> Is the board being cautious about irresponsible growth in AI and lack of ethical governance? Is caution the 'mission'? > Or is the board blowing off responsi

> Is the board being cautious about irresponsible growth in AI and lack of ethical governance? Is caution the 'mission'? > Or is the board blowing off responsible, cautious management in pursuit of runaway profit? To summarize the context: The chartered mission is to lead the safe pursuit of AGI. The leader of the “coup” is a scientist who feels passionately about that mission. The CEO who was fired was a venture capitalist responsible for the recent product launches and lucrative commercial agreements. Everybody involved is still being vague about the underlying dispute, but (so far) it plausibly reads that a passionate and anxious idealist felt like his opportunity to fulfill a mission critical to the future of humanity was being disrupted by a profit-seeking dealmaker. (Whether the researcher’s purported worry is sound or not is likely irrelevant to explaining the news itself. It’s a closely held private org and so typical internal disagreements can have major practical consequences)