5 ms·

Altman is more powerful than I thought.

crazygringo 3y ago
I don't think so at all -- the board was simply far dumber than we thought. The board didn't plan or think this through at all. This isn't about Sam being powerful, just about him being a reasonable predictable cofounder Microsoft can work with. It's the rest of the board that shocked Microsoft with how unprofessional their actions were, that they can't be worked with. The very idea that they would fire Sam without even consulting with Microsoft first is such a gigantic red flag in judgment.
- cthalupa 3y ago
  If the issue is they believe Sam's focus on commercialization is inherently against their charter, Microsoft is key to that - they are the shining example of this shift. Consulting with them would be antithetical to solving the problem. For a for-profit, the pragmatic approach due to Microsoft also being the majority computer provider (We can set aside the investments for the moment - most are in the form of compute credits and come in tranches. OpenAI is not sitting on $10B in cash in their bank accounts or whatever) would make a lot of sense. But they're a non-profit that operate in accordance to their pipe-dream charter. You and I might be skeptical of it or just think it's generally dumb, but non-profits are allowed to believe in pipe-dreams and pursue them. At the very least they still issued a poorly worded statement and have not been able to recover from that, but it is quite possible that their attitude towards the investors in the for-profit is entirely consistent with the charter they are supposed to be following.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Exactly. The board should have been stocked with seasoned professionals not with people who on an idle Friday decide to throw their weight around to see what that feels like without any idea of the possible ramifications of such acts.
dontupvoteme 3y ago
It's not Altman per se, it's the hypercapitalism interests that he represents and serves.
layer8 3y ago
I think he’s lucky that apparently many OpenAI employees support him, as otherwise there would be less leverage over the board. Investors can threaten the board, but where would they go if the brainpower stays with OpenAI?
- alecco 3y ago
  > I think he’s lucky that apparently many OpenAI employees support him This claim on the press had zero substance. It could well be, but there were no wide resignations or anything. Just 4 execs. OTOH, Altman going for the high score could bump employee TCO 10x. So who knows. Passion vs greed.
  - Dudester230602 3y ago
    > Passion vs greed. In a city where a normal person cannot buy a house and employer wants 25% office time? Give me a break, they just want to live like people could in 1950s.
  - medler 3y ago
    I’m old enough to remember when all the employees who supported him were going to resign at 5 pm Saturday
    - Davidzheng 3y ago
      I think the hearts on Twitter was supposed to be a show of power on Sam's side. I wouldn't be surprised if that number is >20% of employees
      - lucubratory 3y ago
        That number is 91 employees out OAI's 700. Seems like a pretty reasonable number of people to support Sam's faction, but absolutely recoverable for OAI even if every single heart leaves.
        3y ago
hotnfresh 3y ago
If he wins in this, it’ll mean he’d maneuvered himself into a position of controlling the whole thing—in fact, if not on paper—some time back. The “coup” people’ve been writing about will have been his actions over the last year or so, not the board’s. Big money on the line. Insane, life-changing payouts in the cards. Altman and MS on the side of those, the board on the side of the mission. Money’s likely to win.
- tempnow987 3y ago
  If the board has the support of all the staff the board will be absolutely fine. That said, not clear to me that board is supported by the staff. So if Sam goes, and many of the key staff go... will be interesting. And the boards style in all this, if that is the "mission" - is wild. You have partners, staff, businesses - doing a VC round and you blow it all up without it sounds like even talking to your board president? Normally this type of ouster requires a properly noticed meeting!
  - Davidzheng 3y ago
    Because a lot of the staff is there for the high compensation and they view the mission as an inconvenience
  - shrimpx 3y ago
    I think some of the staff definitely supports Altman, and are down to quit and follow him. Personally I hope that's what happens. Separate the altruistic-mission guys from the big-profit guys and let them go to town in their respective spheres.
    - null0pointer 3y ago
      The sad part is that nearly 100% of investment and resources will follow the big-profit group leaving the altruistic-mission guys in the dust with no resources and no money.
- 4death4 3y ago
  It seems more like Microsoft controls the whole thing, and they do. They have a near-majority of shares.

I don't think so at all -- the board was simply far dumber than we thought. The board didn't plan or think this through at all. This isn't about Sam being powerful, just about him being a reasonable predictable cofounder Microsoft can work with. It's the rest of the board that shocked Microsoft with how unprofessional their actions were, that they can't be worked with. The very idea that they would fire Sam without even consulting with Microsoft first is such a gigantic red flag in judgment.

cthalupa 3y ago
If the issue is they believe Sam's focus on commercialization is inherently against their charter, Microsoft is key to that - they are the shining example of this shift. Consulting with them would be antithetical to solving the problem. For a for-profit, the pragmatic approach due to Microsoft also being the majority computer provider (We can set aside the investments for the moment - most are in the form of compute credits and come in tranches. OpenAI is not sitting on $10B in cash in their bank accounts or whatever) would make a lot of sense. But they're a non-profit that operate in accordance to their pipe-dream charter. You and I might be skeptical of it or just think it's generally dumb, but non-profits are allowed to believe in pipe-dreams and pursue them. At the very least they still issued a poorly worded statement and have not been able to recover from that, but it is quite possible that their attitude towards the investors in the for-profit is entirely consistent with the charter they are supposed to be following.
jacquesm 3y ago
Exactly. The board should have been stocked with seasoned professionals not with people who on an idle Friday decide to throw their weight around to see what that feels like without any idea of the possible ramifications of such acts.

dontupvoteme 3y ago

It's not Altman per se, it's the hypercapitalism interests that he represents and serves.

layer8 3y ago

I think he’s lucky that apparently many OpenAI employees support him, as otherwise there would be less leverage over the board. Investors can threaten the board, but where would they go if the brainpower stays with OpenAI?

alecco 3y ago
> I think he’s lucky that apparently many OpenAI employees support him This claim on the press had zero substance. It could well be, but there were no wide resignations or anything. Just 4 execs. OTOH, Altman going for the high score could bump employee TCO 10x. So who knows. Passion vs greed.
- Dudester230602 3y ago
  > Passion vs greed. In a city where a normal person cannot buy a house and employer wants 25% office time? Give me a break, they just want to live like people could in 1950s.
- medler 3y ago
  I’m old enough to remember when all the employees who supported him were going to resign at 5 pm Saturday
  - Davidzheng 3y ago
    I think the hearts on Twitter was supposed to be a show of power on Sam's side. I wouldn't be surprised if that number is >20% of employees
    - lucubratory 3y ago
      That number is 91 employees out OAI's 700. Seems like a pretty reasonable number of people to support Sam's faction, but absolutely recoverable for OAI even if every single heart leaves.
      - 3y ago

hotnfresh 3y ago

If he wins in this, it’ll mean he’d maneuvered himself into a position of controlling the whole thing—in fact, if not on paper—some time back. The “coup” people’ve been writing about will have been his actions over the last year or so, not the board’s. Big money on the line. Insane, life-changing payouts in the cards. Altman and MS on the side of those, the board on the side of the mission. Money’s likely to win.

tempnow987 3y ago
If the board has the support of all the staff the board will be absolutely fine. That said, not clear to me that board is supported by the staff. So if Sam goes, and many of the key staff go... will be interesting. And the boards style in all this, if that is the "mission" - is wild. You have partners, staff, businesses - doing a VC round and you blow it all up without it sounds like even talking to your board president? Normally this type of ouster requires a properly noticed meeting!
- Davidzheng 3y ago
  Because a lot of the staff is there for the high compensation and they view the mission as an inconvenience
- shrimpx 3y ago
  I think some of the staff definitely supports Altman, and are down to quit and follow him. Personally I hope that's what happens. Separate the altruistic-mission guys from the big-profit guys and let them go to town in their respective spheres.
  - null0pointer 3y ago
    The sad part is that nearly 100% of investment and resources will follow the big-profit group leaving the altruistic-mission guys in the dust with no resources and no money.
4death4 3y ago
It seems more like Microsoft controls the whole thing, and they do. They have a near-majority of shares.