Disagree. The fact that the board are so cagey about why exactly they sacked Altman in the first place (other than some vague hand waving about high-minded idea

Disagree. The fact that the board are so cagey about why exactly they sacked Altman in the first place (other than some vague hand waving about high-minded idealism) speaks volumes. They sacked him because as head of a for-profit corporation, he tried to develop products that would (gasp!) make money? Seriously? Investor returns are already limited in their corporate structure, which is supposed to serve as the check on the profit motive. If they don't think that's sufficient anymore, then they should amend their corporate charter and renegotiate with their investor, not fire the CEO out of nowhere. Unless the whole point was to get investors to withdraw money, in which case... um well done. I'm not some Sam Altman cultist, and I don't particularly care what happens to OpenAI. But this smells like a garden-variety Silicon Valley board coup. The board are trying to present this as them standing between The World and Armageddon, and they're doing a very bad job.