4 ms·

No "malfeasance" behind Sam Altman's firing, OpenAI memo says

34 points by felixbraun 3y ago

jayveeone 3y ago
So why the spectacle? Why the melodramatic press release and thoughtless communication with investors? I will not shed a tear for Altman or Microsoft, but this fantastic Friday massacre, don't seem to line up with cause.
- varelse 3y ago
  [dead]
morph123 3y ago
As smart as the people are at OpenAI they sure do some incredibly stupid things. I guess it proves that this "company" is ran by scientists and not business people, which I guess is reassuring?
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  The company is run, somehow, by people who have never run much of anything in their lives. Results are as expected. How that situation came about would be an interesting story in itself.
  - belter 3y ago
    Does that not apply also to Sam Altman?
    - CamperBob2 3y ago
      When he got started, yeah. I don't know how he became a YC partner without investing a lot more than he would've netted from the Loopt exit. At this point I don't think anyone can question his track record, based on OpenAI's success at both R&D and fundraising. They are apparently trying to get him back onboard, if that means anything...
- Zigurd 3y ago
  Did only Sam have Satya Nadella's phone number? Seems like a rude surprise for a Friday afternoon.
  - belter 3y ago
    Your concern for Microsoft feelings is noted...
- tempsy 3y ago
  I mean most of the people high up in the company as well as the entire board appear to be fairly junior (early to mid 30s).
croes 3y ago
Duplicate https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38322688 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38322688
jessenaser 3y ago
If this was a division over the safety of models, the safest thing they could do is to release older models as soon as they release a new one. If they release GPT-5 (closed), then they should release GPT-3.5 with its weights, stack, and documentation. Real research can be done to see what safety precautions can be learned from it, as the successors are quite similar. For example, GPT-3.5 is still updated with features as of Dev Day, and gives a quite similar tech stack to the newest models. --> What no one on Earth wants to bet on is a few people in San Francisco figuring safety out, when the rest of the world could be working on that. <-- If a model is leaked to the public, you have no time to prepare for safety. The damage is done. If a model is kept forever behind closed doors you do not follow your mission of safe AGI. This only proves that overnight moves could be made that destabilizes who has control over the most powerful models. At least an open release of older models shows your dedication to innovation and safety. I'd bet that since Microsoft has a copy of the stack and weights, and that the US govt has their own Azure instance cloud, the US already has a copy of OpenAI's technology. So its not going to die if OpenAI crumbles. It just goes to two different hands. --- And this is just a bare minimum step. Not even considering this means there is a larger problem than ideological division. It is more like a power grab. *As much as people think that releasing models is a safety risk, it might just be the best thing you can do.* --- Economical Steps for a release that satisfies safety and investment (don't give away your MOAT): Current Model: GPT-4; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-3.5; Fully Release GPT-3 Current Model: GPT-5; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-4; Fully Release GPT-3.5 Current Model: GPT-6; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-5; Fully Release GPT-4
- nathanaldensr 3y ago
  Define "safety," because for me and others, the definition seems to be "not projecting politically-incorrect views or information" or just straight up censorship.
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    "Safety" = "Our company is safe from competition, thanks to captive regulators."
  - 3y ago
yankput 3y ago
This really feel like a supervillain origin story though Now Sam should make a green goblin mask and learn how to fly around town
- sage76 3y ago
  Ilya is spiderman then lol.
pelagicAustral 3y ago
OpenAI has been bleeding money for a while [0]. Why would it be so crazy that the board wants heads to roll? The craziest part really is that he literally was allowed to give a keynote like a week ago (a good one), but of course, have they sacked him before... what kind of message that sends. Instead, he got sacked after, ANNOUNCEMENTS WERE MADE! 0: https://futurism.com/the-byte/openai-losing-money-chatgpt https://futurism.com/the-byte/openai-losing-money-chatgpt
- LeafItAlone 3y ago
  1. It seems like everyone in the space is loosing money and yet investors still seem willing to just keep throwing more at them. 2. From other accounts, the people they fired were the ones leaving more heavily towards commercialization. Based on what I’ve read (which is certainly multiple steps removed from the source), these would have been the wrong members to oust if the goal was to make more money.

34 points by felixbraun 3y ago

So why the spectacle? Why the melodramatic press release and thoughtless communication with investors? I will not shed a tear for Altman or Microsoft, but this fantastic Friday massacre, don't seem to line up with cause.

varelse 3y ago
[dead]

morph123 3y ago

As smart as the people are at OpenAI they sure do some incredibly stupid things. I guess it proves that this "company" is ran by scientists and not business people, which I guess is reassuring?

CamperBob2 3y ago
The company is run, somehow, by people who have never run much of anything in their lives. Results are as expected. How that situation came about would be an interesting story in itself.
- belter 3y ago
  Does that not apply also to Sam Altman?
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    When he got started, yeah. I don't know how he became a YC partner without investing a lot more than he would've netted from the Loopt exit. At this point I don't think anyone can question his track record, based on OpenAI's success at both R&D and fundraising. They are apparently trying to get him back onboard, if that means anything...
Zigurd 3y ago
Did only Sam have Satya Nadella's phone number? Seems like a rude surprise for a Friday afternoon.
- belter 3y ago
  Your concern for Microsoft feelings is noted...
tempsy 3y ago
I mean most of the people high up in the company as well as the entire board appear to be fairly junior (early to mid 30s).

croes 3y ago

Duplicate https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38322688 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38322688

jessenaser 3y ago

If this was a division over the safety of models, the safest thing they could do is to release older models as soon as they release a new one. If they release GPT-5 (closed), then they should release GPT-3.5 with its weights, stack, and documentation. Real research can be done to see what safety precautions can be learned from it, as the successors are quite similar. For example, GPT-3.5 is still updated with features as of Dev Day, and gives a quite similar tech stack to the newest models. --> What no one on Earth wants to bet on is a few people in San Francisco figuring safety out, when the rest of the world could be working on that. <-- If a model is leaked to the public, you have no time to prepare for safety. The damage is done. If a model is kept forever behind closed doors you do not follow your mission of safe AGI. This only proves that overnight moves could be made that destabilizes who has control over the most powerful models. At least an open release of older models shows your dedication to innovation and safety. I'd bet that since Microsoft has a copy of the stack and weights, and that the US govt has their own Azure instance cloud, the US already has a copy of OpenAI's technology. So its not going to die if OpenAI crumbles. It just goes to two different hands. --- And this is just a bare minimum step. Not even considering this means there is a larger problem than ideological division. It is more like a power grab. *As much as people think that releasing models is a safety risk, it might just be the best thing you can do.* --- Economical Steps for a release that satisfies safety and investment (don't give away your MOAT): Current Model: GPT-4; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-3.5; Fully Release GPT-3 Current Model: GPT-5; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-4; Fully Release GPT-3.5 Current Model: GPT-6; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-5; Fully Release GPT-4

nathanaldensr 3y ago
Define "safety," because for me and others, the definition seems to be "not projecting politically-incorrect views or information" or just straight up censorship.
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  "Safety" = "Our company is safe from competition, thanks to captive regulators."
- 3y ago

yankput 3y ago

This really feel like a supervillain origin story though Now Sam should make a green goblin mask and learn how to fly around town

sage76 3y ago
Ilya is spiderman then lol.

pelagicAustral 3y ago

OpenAI has been bleeding money for a while [0]. Why would it be so crazy that the board wants heads to roll? The craziest part really is that he literally was allowed to give a keynote like a week ago (a good one), but of course, have they sacked him before... what kind of message that sends. Instead, he got sacked after, ANNOUNCEMENTS WERE MADE! 0: https://futurism.com/the-byte/openai-losing-money-chatgpt https://futurism.com/the-byte/openai-losing-money-chatgpt

LeafItAlone 3y ago
1. It seems like everyone in the space is loosing money and yet investors still seem willing to just keep throwing more at them. 2. From other accounts, the people they fired were the ones leaving more heavily towards commercialization. Based on what I’ve read (which is certainly multiple steps removed from the source), these would have been the wrong members to oust if the goal was to make more money.