4 ms·

Complete clown show by Ilya, Helen, Adam, and Tasha.

by junofan 3y ago

EMIRELADERO 3y ago
How would you have done it?
- junofan 3y ago
  Done what? A competent board would not do this.
  - EMIRELADERO 3y ago
    Suppose there's an unfixable conflict of interest/vision between Altman and the board, what would you have done if you were in the board's shoes?
- colmvp 3y ago
  To be frank, isn't it weird to appoint an interim CEO who sides with the person you ousted? Why not have appointed someone more sympathetic to your position?
whoknowsidont 3y ago
[flagged]
- adastra22 3y ago
  So remove Ilya, got it.
  - whoknowsidont 3y ago
    Can you expound on what you mean?
    - adastra22 3y ago
      Original comment I’m replying to is flagged and rightfully removed. It was saying OpenAI is better off without a certain category of poisonous person that I won’t try to repeat, the implication being Sam. My flippant response was that Ilya better fit that category of people-putting-politics-into-business.
      - whoknowsidont 3y ago
        >My flippant response The word you are looking for is disingenuous. Sam has a history of this, Ilya does not. But in an industry deeply confused by EA, the stance is of course an unpopular one.
        adastra22 3y ago
        Maybe you don’t consider recent AI safety policies to be politics, but they clearly are. The idea that AI research should be regulated, that availability of models should be restricted by fiat, and that a state or oligarchy should control what future research is done is absolutely a political stance. Sam was the face for these moves by OpenAI, but he was always speaking for an uneasy coalition of saftyists within the organization. That government regulation would have resulted in a giant moat for OpenAI was just gravy on top. But it was always being pressed for by hard-line safetyists, and the firing on Friday was a result of the hard liners thinking Sam wasn’t trying hard enough. Yes the industry is deeply confused by EA. They think it is their role to restrict freedoms and dictate what will or will not be done. They thought they had this power. In the last 74 hours they have learned how wrong they were. However this plays out, all checks the EA safetyists had on the situation are gone. Either Sam and Greg go to Microsoft with most of the team, or the safetyists are ejected entirely from OpenAI. Either way the brakes and guardrails are off.
- techolic 3y ago
  [flagged]
fatbird 3y ago
You're assuming this story is legit. Anonymous sources have been all over the place, seeding the idea that that Sam will return; the board hasn't responded. Maybe it's as big a mess on the board's side as you say. Maybe Sam's supporters are trying to create a dominant narrative that becomes self-fulfilling.
- junofan 3y ago
  I’m not assuming anything. It’s been a clown show since the press release smearing the outgoing executive.
  - fatbird 3y ago
    You're assuming the smears aren't deserved :) More anonymous voices have pointed out that Sam was effectively laying the groundwork for one or two more AI startups based on the work OpenAI was doing, without informing the board, and in contravention of the way OpenAI was deliberately structured to restrain unfettered AI profit-seeking. But again, anonymous voices. And in the background, Sam's sister making very dire accusations against him. There's a whole lot of smoke, but I have no clue where the fire is, and I'm sceptical of everyone now, especially Sam Altman because his image is so shiny that it feels like a professional effort.
  - dang 3y ago
    Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. You've been on HN for many years and we're certainly glad to have you - we just need comments to be more thoughtful/substantive and a little less reactive. I hope that makes sense.
voidfunc 3y ago
They're going to be helming a ghost company soon. Good job; great effort. They're never going to get the funding they need after this clown show. Nobody is going to give them $$$ without seriously restructuring the board.
t_durden 3y ago
[flagged]
- labster 3y ago
  I understand the conspiracy suggestions but from my personal experience this seems a lot like typical nonprofit board drama. Just with a couple orders of magnitude more money. I mean seriously, how many people here have complained about Mozilla C-level staff being removed? It’s the same dynamic with a nonprofit overseeing the commercial corp.

Complete clown show by Ilya, Helen, Adam, and Tasha.

EMIRELADERO 3y ago

How would you have done it?

junofan 3y ago
Done what? A competent board would not do this.
- EMIRELADERO 3y ago
  Suppose there's an unfixable conflict of interest/vision between Altman and the board, what would you have done if you were in the board's shoes?
colmvp 3y ago
To be frank, isn't it weird to appoint an interim CEO who sides with the person you ousted? Why not have appointed someone more sympathetic to your position?

whoknowsidont 3y ago

[flagged]

adastra22 3y ago
So remove Ilya, got it.
- whoknowsidont 3y ago
  Can you expound on what you mean?
  - adastra22 3y ago
    Original comment I’m replying to is flagged and rightfully removed. It was saying OpenAI is better off without a certain category of poisonous person that I won’t try to repeat, the implication being Sam. My flippant response was that Ilya better fit that category of people-putting-politics-into-business.
    - whoknowsidont 3y ago
      >My flippant response The word you are looking for is disingenuous. Sam has a history of this, Ilya does not. But in an industry deeply confused by EA, the stance is of course an unpopular one.
      - adastra22 3y ago
        Maybe you don’t consider recent AI safety policies to be politics, but they clearly are. The idea that AI research should be regulated, that availability of models should be restricted by fiat, and that a state or oligarchy should control what future research is done is absolutely a political stance. Sam was the face for these moves by OpenAI, but he was always speaking for an uneasy coalition of saftyists within the organization. That government regulation would have resulted in a giant moat for OpenAI was just gravy on top. But it was always being pressed for by hard-line safetyists, and the firing on Friday was a result of the hard liners thinking Sam wasn’t trying hard enough. Yes the industry is deeply confused by EA. They think it is their role to restrict freedoms and dictate what will or will not be done. They thought they had this power. In the last 74 hours they have learned how wrong they were. However this plays out, all checks the EA safetyists had on the situation are gone. Either Sam and Greg go to Microsoft with most of the team, or the safetyists are ejected entirely from OpenAI. Either way the brakes and guardrails are off.
techolic 3y ago
[flagged]

fatbird 3y ago

You're assuming this story is legit. Anonymous sources have been all over the place, seeding the idea that that Sam will return; the board hasn't responded. Maybe it's as big a mess on the board's side as you say. Maybe Sam's supporters are trying to create a dominant narrative that becomes self-fulfilling.

junofan 3y ago
I’m not assuming anything. It’s been a clown show since the press release smearing the outgoing executive.
- fatbird 3y ago
  You're assuming the smears aren't deserved :) More anonymous voices have pointed out that Sam was effectively laying the groundwork for one or two more AI startups based on the work OpenAI was doing, without informing the board, and in contravention of the way OpenAI was deliberately structured to restrain unfettered AI profit-seeking. But again, anonymous voices. And in the background, Sam's sister making very dire accusations against him. There's a whole lot of smoke, but I have no clue where the fire is, and I'm sceptical of everyone now, especially Sam Altman because his image is so shiny that it feels like a professional effort.
- dang 3y ago
  Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. You've been on HN for many years and we're certainly glad to have you - we just need comments to be more thoughtful/substantive and a little less reactive. I hope that makes sense.

voidfunc 3y ago

They're going to be helming a ghost company soon. Good job; great effort. They're never going to get the funding they need after this clown show. Nobody is going to give them $$$ without seriously restructuring the board.

t_durden 3y ago

[flagged]

labster 3y ago
I understand the conspiracy suggestions but from my personal experience this seems a lot like typical nonprofit board drama. Just with a couple orders of magnitude more money. I mean seriously, how many people here have complained about Mozilla C-level staff being removed? It’s the same dynamic with a nonprofit overseeing the commercial corp.