10 ms·
> The board's job is not to do right There is why you do something. And there is how you do something. OpenAI is well within its rights to change strategy eve
by threeseed 3y ago
> The board's job is not to do right
There is why you do something. And there is how you do something.
OpenAI is well within its rights to change strategy even as bold as from a profit-seeking behemoth to a smaller research focused team. But how they went about this is appalling, unprofessional and a blight on corporate governance.
They have blind-sided partners (e.g. Satya is furious), split the company into two camps and have let Sam and Greg go angry and seeking retribution. Which in turn now creates the threat that a for-profit version of OpenAI dominates the market with no higher purpose.
For me there is no justification for how this all happened.
- mise_en_place 3y agoKeep in mind that the rest of the board members have ties to US intelligence. Something isn't right here.
- simonjgreen 3y agoDo you have citations for that? That’s interesting if true
- deeviant 3y agoI'm pretty sure Joseph Gordon-Levitt's wife isn't a CIA plant.
- SturgeonsLaw 3y agoShe works for RAND Corporation
- zxndomisaaz2 3y agoThere had better be US intelligence crawling all over the AI space, otherwise we are all in very deep shit.
- varelse 3y ago[dead]
- whatshisface 3y agoI thought the for-profit AI startup with no higher purpose was OpenAI itself.
- cornholio 3y agoIt is, only it has an exotic ownership structure. Sutskever has just used the features of that structure to install himself as the top dog. The next step is undoubtedly packing the board with his loyalists. Whoever thinks you can tame a 100 billion dollar company by putting a "non-profit" in charge of it, clearly doesn't understand people.
- dragonwriter 3y agoOpenAI is a nonprofit charity with a defined charitable purpose that has a for-profit subsidiary that is explicitly subordinated to the purpose of the nonprofit, to the extent investors in the subsidiary are advised in the operating agreement to treat investments as if they were more like donations, and that the firm will prioritize the charitable function of the nonprofit which retains full governance power over the subsidiary over returning profits, which it may never do.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 3y ago> They have … split the company into two camps By all accounts, this split happened a while ago and led to this firing, not the other way around.
- threeseed 3y agoThe split happened at the management/board level. And instead of resolving this and presenting a unified strategy to the company they have instead allowed for this split to be replicated everywhere. Everyone who was committed to a pro-profit company has to ask if they are next to be treated like Sam. It's incredibly destabilising and unnecessary.
- Jare 3y ago> Everyone who was committed to a pro-profit company has to ask if they are next to be treated like Sam. They probably joined because it was the most awesome place to pursue their skills in AI, but they _knew_ they were joining an organization with explicitly not a profit goal. If they hoped that profit chasing would eventually win, that's their problem and, frankly, having this wakeup call is a good thing for them so they can reevaluate their choices.
- Apocryphon 3y agoLet the two sides now create separate organizations and pursue their respective pure undivided priority to the fullest. May the competition flow.
- fuzztester 3y agoThe possibility of getting fired is an occupational hazard for anyone working in any company, unless something in your employment contract says otherwise. And even then, you can still be fired. Biz 101. I don't know why people even need to be explained this, except for ignorance of basic facts of business life.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> split the company into two camps The split existed long prior to the board action, and extended up into the board itself. If anything, the board action is a turning point toward decisively ending the split and achieving unity of purpose.
- galangalalgol 3y agoCan someone explain the sides? Ilya seems to think transformers could make AGI and they need to be careful? Sam said what? "We need to make better LLMs to make more money."? My general thought is that whatever architecture gets you to AGI, you don't prevent it from killing everyone by chaining it better, you prevent that by training it better, and then treating it like someone with intrinsic value. As opposed to locking it in a room with 4chan.
- doubled112 3y ago> locking it in a room with 4chan. Didn’t Microsoft already try this experiment a few years back with an AI chatbot?
- mindcrime 3y ago> Didn’t Microsoft already try this experiment a few years back with an AI chatbot? You may be thinking of Tay? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot)
- doubled112 3y agoThat’s the one.
- YetAnotherNick 3y ago> treating it like someone with intrinsic value Do you think if chickens treated us better with intrinsic value we won't kill them? For AGI superhuman x risk folks that's the bigger argument.
- nprateem 3y ago> Which in turn now creates the threat that a for-profit version of OpenAI dominates the market with no higher purpose. If it was so easy to go to the back of the queue and become a threat, Open AI wouldn't be in the dominant position they're in now. If any of the leavers have taken IP with them, expect court cases.
- bmitc 3y ago> They have blind-sided partners (e.g. Satya is furious), split the company into two camps and have let Sam and Greg go angry and seeking retribution. Given the language in the press release, wouldn't it be more accurate to say that Sam Altman, and not the board, blindsided everyone? It was apparently his actions and no one else's that led to the consequence handed out by the board. > Which in turn now creates the threat that a for-profit version of OpenAI dominates the market with no higher purpose. From all current accounts, doesn't that seem like what Altman and his crew were already trying to do and was the reason for the dismissal in the first place?
- calf 3y agoI wonder if there's a specific term or saying for that, maybe "projection" or "self-victimization" but not quite: when one person biasedly frames that other people were responsible for a bad thing, when it is they yourself that were doing the very thing in the first place. Maybe "hypocrisy"?
- GCA10 3y agoThe only appropriate target for Microsoft's anger would be its own deal negotiators. OpenAI's dual identity as a nonprofit/for-profit business was very well known. And the concentration of power in the nonprofit side was also very well known. From the media coverage of Microsoft's investments, it sounds as if MSFT prioritized getting lots of business for its Azure cloud service -- and didn't prioritize getting a board seat or even an observer's chair.
- hfjjbf 3y ago
- sheepscreek 3y agoIn other words, it’s unheard of for a $90B company with weekly active users in excess of 100 million. A coup leaves a very bad taste for everyone - employees, users, investors and the general public. When a company experiences this level of growth over a decade, the board evolves with the company. You end up with board members that have all been there, done that, and can truly guide the management on the challenges they face. OpenAI's hypergrowth meant it didn’t have the time to do that. So the board that was great for a $100 million, even a billion $ startup falls completely flat for 90x the size. I don’t have faith in their ability to know what is best for OpenAI. These are uncharted waters for anyone though. This is an exceptionally big non-profit with the power to change the world - quite literally.
- roguecoder 3y agoWhy do you think someone who could be CEO of a $100 million company would be qualified to run a billion dollar company? Not providing this kind of oversight is how we get disasters like FTX and WeWork.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hfjjbf 3y agoAnd yet it’s very heard of for corporations to poison our air and water, cut corners and kill peoples, and lie, cheat, and steal. That happens every day and nobody cares. And yet four people deciding the put something - anything - above money is somehow a disaster. Give me a break.
- HAL3000 3y agoAs someone who has orchestrated two coups in different organizations, where the leadership did not align with the organization's interests and missions, I can assure you that the final stage of such a coup is not something that can be executed after just an hour of preparation or thought. It requires months of planning. The trigger is only pulled when there is sufficient evidence or justification for such action. Building support for a coup takes time and must be justified by a pattern of behavior from your opponent, not just a single action. Extensive backchanneling and one-on-one discussions are necessary to gauge where others stand, share your perspective, demonstrate how the person in question is acting against the organization's interests, and seek their support. Initially, this support is not for the coup, but rather to ensure alignment of views. Then, when something significant happens, everything is already in place. You've been waiting for that one decisive action to pull the trigger, which is why everything then unfolds so quickly.
- jacquesm 3y agoAll of this is spot on. The key to it all is 'if you strike at the king, you best not miss'.
- chaostheory 3y agoGoing off on a big tangent, but Jiang Zemin had made several failed assassination attempts on Xi Jinping, but he was still able to die of old age.
- ls612 3y agoBy assassination I assume you mean metaphorical? As in to derail his rise before becoming party leader?
- chaostheory 3y agoNo, literal attempts. One attempt involved a battleship “accidentally” firing onto another battleship where both Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping were visiting. https://jamestown.org/program/president-xi-suspects-political-conspiracy-behind-tianjin-blasts/ https://jamestown.org/program/president-xi-suspects-politica... Biased source, but she’s able to get a lot of unreported news from the mainland. https://www.jenniferzengblog.com/home/2021/9/20/deleted-report-assassination-plot-and-the-ccps-intensifying-power-struggles https://www.jenniferzengblog.com/home/2021/9/20/deleted-repo... I will try to find more sources but Google is just shit these days. See my other comment for more. A big problem is that mainland China is like the hermit kingdom. It’s a black hole for any news the CCP doesn’t want to get out
- underlipton 3y agoI'm sure my coworkers at [retailer] were not happy to be even shorter staffed than usual when I was ambush fired, but no one who mattered cared, just as no one who matters cares when it happens to thousands of workers every single day in this country. Sorry to say, my schadenfreude levels are quite high. Maybe if the practice were TRULY verboten in our society... but I guess "professional" treatment is only for the suits and wunderkids.
- pokepim 3y agoI have noticed you decided to use several German words in your reply, trying not to be petty but at least you should attempt to write them correctly. It’s either Wunderkind (German word for child prodigy) or english translation: wonder kid.
- underlipton 3y agoYou are correct, though I must be Mandela Effect-ing, because I could have sworn that "wunderkid" was an accepted American English corruption of the original term, a la... Well, "a la" (à la). My use of "schadenfreude", in general, can be attributed largely to Avenue Q and Death Note. Twice is coincidence. EDIT: I just noticed "verboten." Now I'm worried.
- jasonwatkinspdx 3y ago> OpenAI is well within its rights to change strategy even as bold as from a profit-seeking behemoth to a smaller research focused team. But how they went about this is appalling, unprofessional and a blight on corporate governance. This wasn't a change of strategy, it was a restoration of it. OpenAI was structured with a 501c3 in oversight from the beginning exactly because they wanted to prioritize using AI for the good of humanity over profits.
- ffgjgf1 3y agoYet they need massive investment from Microsoft to accomplish that? > restoration Wouldn’t that mean that over the longterm they will just be outcompeted by the profit seeking entities. It’s not like OpenAI is self sustainable (or even can be if they chose the non-profit way)
- fsckboy 3y ago>Yet they need massive investment from Microsoft to accomplish that? massive spending is needed for any project as massive as "AI", so what are you even asking? A "feed the poor project" does not expect to make a profit, but, yes, it needs large cash infusions...
- slenk 3y agoThis isn't going to make me think in any way that OpenAI will return to its more open beginning. If anything it shows me they don't know what they want
- DebtDeflation 3y ago>They have blind-sided partners This is the biggest takeaway for me. People are building businesses around OpenAI APIs and now they want to suddenly swing the pendulum back to being a fantasy AGI foundation and de-emphasize the commercial aspect? Customers are baking OpenAI's APIs into their enterprise applications. Without funding from Microsoft their current model is unsustainable. They'll be split into two separate companies within 6 months in my opinion.
- hilux 3y agoYou're entitled to your opinions. But as far as I can tell, unless you are in the exec suites at both OpenAI and at Microsoft, these are just your opinions, yet you present them as fact.
- vGPU 3y agoAnd the stupid thing is, they could have just used the allegations his sister made against him as the reason for the firing and ridden off into the sunset, Scott-free.
- jabroni_salad 3y agoI'm glad they didn't. She has enough troubles without a target like that on her back.
- zer0c00ler 3y agoYou assume they were indeed blindsided, which I very much doubt. I think it’s a good outcome overall. More decentralization and focused research, and a new company that focuses on product.
- snickerbockers 3y ago>Which in turn now creates the threat that a for-profit version of OpenAI dominates the market with no higher purpose. Is Microsoft a higher purpose?
- Vegenoid 3y ago> a blight on corporate governance > They have blind-sided partners (e.g. Satya is furious) > the threat that a for-profit version of OpenAI dominates the market It's seeming like corporate governance and market domination are exactly the kind of thing the board are trying to separate from with this move. They can't achieve this by going to investors first and talking about it - you think Microsoft isn't going to do everything in their power to prevent it from happening if they knew about it? I think their mission is laudable, and they simply did it the way it had to be done. You can't slowly untangle yourself from one of the biggest companies in the world while it is coiling around your extremely valuable technology.
- deepGem 3y ago"And there is how you do something" Sorry I don't see the 'how' as necessarily appalling. The less appalling alternative could have been weeks of discussions and the board asking for Sam's resignation to preserve the decorum of the company. How would that have helped the company ? The internal rife would have spread, employees would have gotten restless, leading to reduced productivity and shipping. Instead, isn't this a better outcome ? There is immense short term pain, but there is no ambiguity and the company has set a clear course of action. To affirm that the board has caused a split in the company is quite preposterous, unless you have first hand information that such a split has actually happened. As far as public information is concerned 3 researchers have quit so far, and you have this from one of the EMs. "For those wondering what’ll happen next, the answer is we’ll keep shipping. @sama & @gdb weren’t micro-managers. The comes from the many geniuses here in research product eng & design. There’s clear internal uniformity among these leaders that we’re here for the bigger mission." This snippet in fact shows the genius of Sam and gdb, how they enabled the teams to run even in their absence. Is it unfortunate that the board fired Sam, from the engineer's and builder's perspective yes, from the long term AGI research perspective, I don't know.
- mandeepj 3y ago> e.g. Satya is furious Oh! So, now you got him furious? when just yesterday he made a rushed statement to standby Mira. https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/11/17/a-statement-from-microsoft-chairman-and-ceo-satya-nadella/ https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/11/17/a-statement-from...
- mola 3y agoThe way Altman behaved and manipulated the board to form this Frankenstein company is also appalling. I think it's clear now that openAI board are not business ppl, and they had no idea how to work with someone as cold and manipulative as Altman, thus they blundered and made fools of themselves, as often happen to the naive.