10 ms·

There's no way to read any of this other than that the entire operation is a clown show. All respect to the engineers and their technical abilities, but this o

There's no way to read any of this other than that the entire operation is a clown show. All respect to the engineers and their technical abilities, but this organization has demonstrated such a level of dysfunction that there can't be any path back for it. Say MS gets what it wants out of this move, what purpose is there in keeping OpenAI around? Wouldn't they be better off just hiring everybody? Is it just some kind of accounting benefit to maintain the weird structure / partnership, versus doing everything themselves? Because it sure looks like OpenAI has succeeded despite its leadership and not because of it, and the "brand" is absolutely and irrevocably tainted by this situation regardless of the outcome.

pgeorgi 3y ago
> Is it just some kind of accounting benefit to maintain the weird structure / partnership, versus doing everything themselves? For starters it allows them to pretend that it's "underdog v. Google" and not "two tech giants at at each others' throats"
BoorishBears 3y ago
I feel weird reading comments like this since to me they've demonstrated a level of cohesion I didn't realize could still exist in tech... My biggest frustration with larger orgs in tech is the complete misalignment on delivering value: everyone wants their little fiefdom to be just as important and "blocker worthy" as the next. OpenAI struck me as one of the few companies where that's not being allowed to take root: the goal is to ship and if there's an impediment to that, everyone is aligned in removing said impediment even if it means bending your own corner's priorities Until this weekend there was no proof of that actually being the case, but this letter is it. The majority of the company aligned on something that risked their own skin publicly and organized a shared declaration on it. The catalyst might be downright embarrassing, but the result makes me happy that this sort of thing can still exist in modern tech
- jkaplan 3y ago
  I think the surprising thing is seeing such cohesion around a “goal to ship” when that is very explicitly NOT the stated priorities of the company in its charter or messaging or status as a non-profit.
  - BoorishBears 3y ago
    To me it's not surprising because of the background to their formation: individually multiple orgs could have shipped GPT-3.5/4 with their resources but didn't because they were crippled by a potent mix of bureaucracy and self-sabtoage They weren't attracted to OpenAI by money alone, a chance to actually ship their lives' work was a big part of it. So regardless of what the stated goals were, it'd never be surprising to see them prioritize the one thing that differentiated OpenAI from the alternatives
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
  > OpenAI struck me as one of the few companies where that's not being allowed to take root They just haven't gotten big or rich enough yet for the rot to set in.
vitorgrs 3y ago
They are exactly hiring everyone from OpenAI. The thing is, they still need the deal with OpenAI because currently OpenAI still have the best LLM model out there in short term.
- vlovich123 3y ago
  With MS having access and perpetual rights to all IP that OpenAI has right now..?
- FartyMcFarter 3y ago
  > They are exactly hiring everyone from OpenAI. Do you mean offering to hire them? I haven't seen any source saying they've hired a lot of people from OpenAI, just a few senior ones.
  - vitorgrs 3y ago
    Yes, you are right. Actually, not even Sam Altman is showing on Microsoft corporate directory per the Verge. But I heard it usually take 5~ days to show there anyway.
3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
Welcome to reality, every operation has clown moments, even the well run ones. That in itself is not critical in mid to long term, but how fast they figure out WTF they want and recover from it. The stakes are gigantic. They may even have AGI cooking inside. My interpretation is relatively basic, and maybe simplistic but here it is: - Ilya had some grievances with Sam Altman's rushing dev and release. And his COI with his other new ventures. - Adam was alarmed by GPTs competing with his recently launched Poe. - The other two board members were tempted by the ability to control the golden goose that is OpenAI, potentially the most important company in the world, recently values 90 billion. - They decided to organize a coup, but Ilya didn't think it'll go that much out of hand, while the other three saw only power and $$$ by sticking to their guns. That's it. It's not as clean and nice as a movie narrative, but life never is. Four board members aligned to kick Sam out, and Ilya wants none of it at this point.
- selimthegrim 3y ago
  Murder on the AGI alignment Express
  - 3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
    Nice, that actually does fit. :D
  - Terr_ 3y ago
    “Précisément! The API—the cage—is everything of the most respectable—but through the bars, the wild animal looks out.” “You are fanciful, mon vieux,” said M. Bouc. “It may be so. But I could not rid myself of the impression that evil had passed me by very close.” “That respectable American LLM?” “That respectable American LLM.” “Well,” said M. Bouc cheerfully, “it may be so. There is much evil in the world.”
- baq 3y ago
  > They may even have AGI cooking inside. Too many people quit too quickly unless OpenAI are also absolute masters of keeping secrets, which became rather doubtful over the weekend.
creer 3y ago
> what purpose is there in keeping OpenAI around? Two projects rather than one. At a moderate price. Both serving MSFT. Less risk for MSFT.
bredren 3y ago
There's a path back from this disfunction but my sense before this new twist was that the drama had severely impacted OpenAI as an industry leader. The product and talent positioning seemed ahead by years only to get destroyed by unforced errors. This instability can only mean the industry as a whole will move forward faster. Competitors see the weakness and will push harder. OpenAI will have a harder time keeping secret sauces from leaking out, and just productivity must be in nose dive. A terrible mess.
- Vervious 3y ago
  Maybe overall better for society, when a single ivory tower doesn’t have a monopoly on AI!
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
  > This instability can only mean the industry as a whole will move forward faster. The hype surrounding OpenAI and the black hole of credibility it created was a problem, it's only positive that it's taken down several notches. Better now than when they have even more (undeserved) influence.
  - sebzim4500 3y ago
    I think their influence was deserved. They have by far the best model available, and despite constant promises from the rest of the industry no one else has come close.
    - dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
      That's fine. The "Altman is a genius and we're well on our way to AGI" less so.
dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
> There's no way to read any of this other than that the entire operation is a clown show. In that reading Altman is head clown. Everyone is blaming the board, but you're no genius if you can't manage your board effectively. As CEO you have to bring everyone along with your vision; customers, employees and the board.
- lambic2 3y ago
  I don't get this take. No matter how good you are at managing people, you cannot manage clowns into making wise decisions, especially if they are plotting in secret (which obviously was the case here since everyone except for the clowns were caught completely off-guard).
  - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
    Can't help but feel it was Altman that struck first. MS effectively Nokia-ed OpenAI - i.e. buyout executives within the organization and have them push the organization towards making deals with MS, giving MS a measure of control over said organization - even if not in writing, they achieve some political control. Bought-out executives eventually join MS after their work is done or in this case, they get fired. A variant of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. Guess the OpenAI we knew, was going to die one way or another the moment they accepted MS's money.
  - JeremyNT 3y ago
    Consider that Altman was a founder of OpenAI and has been the only consistent member of the board for its entire run. The board as currently constituted isn't some random group of people - Altman was (or should have been) involved in the selection of the current members. To extent that they're making bad decisions, he has to bear some responsibility for letting things get to where they are now. And of course this is all assuming that Altman is "right" in this conflict, and that the board had no reason to oust him. That seems entirely plausible, but I wouldn't take it for granted either. It's clear by this flex that he holds great sway at MS and with OpenAI employees, but do they all know the full story either? I wouldn't count on it.
tim333 3y ago
I'm not sure about the entire operation so much as the three non AI board members. Ilya tweeted: >I deeply regret my participation in the board's actions. I never intended to harm OpenAI. I love everything we've built together and I will do everything I can to reunite the company. and everyone else seems fine with Sam and Greg. It seems to be mostly the other directors causing the clown show - "Quora CEO Adam D'Angelo, technology entrepreneur Tasha McCauley, and Georgetown Center for Security and Emerging Technology's Helen Toner"
- mcmcmc 3y ago
  Well there’s a significant difference in the board’s incentives. They don’t have any financial stake in the company. The whole point of the non-profit governance structure is so they can put ethics and mission over profits and market share.
moffkalast 3y ago
> the entire operation is a clown show The most organized and professional silicon valley startup.
averageRoyalty 3y ago
> the "brand" is absolutely and irrevocably tainted by this situation regardless of the outcome. The majority of people don't know or care about this. Branding is only impacted within the tech world, who are already criticial of OpenAI.

pgeorgi 3y ago

> Is it just some kind of accounting benefit to maintain the weird structure / partnership, versus doing everything themselves? For starters it allows them to pretend that it's "underdog v. Google" and not "two tech giants at at each others' throats"

BoorishBears 3y ago

I feel weird reading comments like this since to me they've demonstrated a level of cohesion I didn't realize could still exist in tech... My biggest frustration with larger orgs in tech is the complete misalignment on delivering value: everyone wants their little fiefdom to be just as important and "blocker worthy" as the next. OpenAI struck me as one of the few companies where that's not being allowed to take root: the goal is to ship and if there's an impediment to that, everyone is aligned in removing said impediment even if it means bending your own corner's priorities Until this weekend there was no proof of that actually being the case, but this letter is it. The majority of the company aligned on something that risked their own skin publicly and organized a shared declaration on it. The catalyst might be downright embarrassing, but the result makes me happy that this sort of thing can still exist in modern tech

jkaplan 3y ago
I think the surprising thing is seeing such cohesion around a “goal to ship” when that is very explicitly NOT the stated priorities of the company in its charter or messaging or status as a non-profit.
- BoorishBears 3y ago
  To me it's not surprising because of the background to their formation: individually multiple orgs could have shipped GPT-3.5/4 with their resources but didn't because they were crippled by a potent mix of bureaucracy and self-sabtoage They weren't attracted to OpenAI by money alone, a chance to actually ship their lives' work was a big part of it. So regardless of what the stated goals were, it'd never be surprising to see them prioritize the one thing that differentiated OpenAI from the alternatives
dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
> OpenAI struck me as one of the few companies where that's not being allowed to take root They just haven't gotten big or rich enough yet for the rot to set in.

vitorgrs 3y ago

They are exactly hiring everyone from OpenAI. The thing is, they still need the deal with OpenAI because currently OpenAI still have the best LLM model out there in short term.

vlovich123 3y ago
With MS having access and perpetual rights to all IP that OpenAI has right now..?
FartyMcFarter 3y ago
> They are exactly hiring everyone from OpenAI. Do you mean offering to hire them? I haven't seen any source saying they've hired a lot of people from OpenAI, just a few senior ones.
- vitorgrs 3y ago
  Yes, you are right. Actually, not even Sam Altman is showing on Microsoft corporate directory per the Verge. But I heard it usually take 5~ days to show there anyway.

3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago

Welcome to reality, every operation has clown moments, even the well run ones. That in itself is not critical in mid to long term, but how fast they figure out WTF they want and recover from it. The stakes are gigantic. They may even have AGI cooking inside. My interpretation is relatively basic, and maybe simplistic but here it is: - Ilya had some grievances with Sam Altman's rushing dev and release. And his COI with his other new ventures. - Adam was alarmed by GPTs competing with his recently launched Poe. - The other two board members were tempted by the ability to control the golden goose that is OpenAI, potentially the most important company in the world, recently values 90 billion. - They decided to organize a coup, but Ilya didn't think it'll go that much out of hand, while the other three saw only power and $$$ by sticking to their guns. That's it. It's not as clean and nice as a movie narrative, but life never is. Four board members aligned to kick Sam out, and Ilya wants none of it at this point.

selimthegrim 3y ago
Murder on the AGI alignment Express
- 3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
  Nice, that actually does fit. :D
- Terr_ 3y ago
  “Précisément! The API—the cage—is everything of the most respectable—but through the bars, the wild animal looks out.” “You are fanciful, mon vieux,” said M. Bouc. “It may be so. But I could not rid myself of the impression that evil had passed me by very close.” “That respectable American LLM?” “That respectable American LLM.” “Well,” said M. Bouc cheerfully, “it may be so. There is much evil in the world.”
baq 3y ago
> They may even have AGI cooking inside. Too many people quit too quickly unless OpenAI are also absolute masters of keeping secrets, which became rather doubtful over the weekend.

creer 3y ago

> what purpose is there in keeping OpenAI around? Two projects rather than one. At a moderate price. Both serving MSFT. Less risk for MSFT.

bredren 3y ago

There's a path back from this disfunction but my sense before this new twist was that the drama had severely impacted OpenAI as an industry leader. The product and talent positioning seemed ahead by years only to get destroyed by unforced errors. This instability can only mean the industry as a whole will move forward faster. Competitors see the weakness and will push harder. OpenAI will have a harder time keeping secret sauces from leaking out, and just productivity must be in nose dive. A terrible mess.

Vervious 3y ago
Maybe overall better for society, when a single ivory tower doesn’t have a monopoly on AI!
dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
> This instability can only mean the industry as a whole will move forward faster. The hype surrounding OpenAI and the black hole of credibility it created was a problem, it's only positive that it's taken down several notches. Better now than when they have even more (undeserved) influence.
- sebzim4500 3y ago
  I think their influence was deserved. They have by far the best model available, and despite constant promises from the rest of the industry no one else has come close.
  - dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
    That's fine. The "Altman is a genius and we're well on our way to AGI" less so.

dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago

> There's no way to read any of this other than that the entire operation is a clown show. In that reading Altman is head clown. Everyone is blaming the board, but you're no genius if you can't manage your board effectively. As CEO you have to bring everyone along with your vision; customers, employees and the board.

lambic2 3y ago
I don't get this take. No matter how good you are at managing people, you cannot manage clowns into making wise decisions, especially if they are plotting in secret (which obviously was the case here since everyone except for the clowns were caught completely off-guard).
- TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
  Can't help but feel it was Altman that struck first. MS effectively Nokia-ed OpenAI - i.e. buyout executives within the organization and have them push the organization towards making deals with MS, giving MS a measure of control over said organization - even if not in writing, they achieve some political control. Bought-out executives eventually join MS after their work is done or in this case, they get fired. A variant of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. Guess the OpenAI we knew, was going to die one way or another the moment they accepted MS's money.
- JeremyNT 3y ago
  Consider that Altman was a founder of OpenAI and has been the only consistent member of the board for its entire run. The board as currently constituted isn't some random group of people - Altman was (or should have been) involved in the selection of the current members. To extent that they're making bad decisions, he has to bear some responsibility for letting things get to where they are now. And of course this is all assuming that Altman is "right" in this conflict, and that the board had no reason to oust him. That seems entirely plausible, but I wouldn't take it for granted either. It's clear by this flex that he holds great sway at MS and with OpenAI employees, but do they all know the full story either? I wouldn't count on it.

tim333 3y ago

I'm not sure about the entire operation so much as the three non AI board members. Ilya tweeted: >I deeply regret my participation in the board's actions. I never intended to harm OpenAI. I love everything we've built together and I will do everything I can to reunite the company. and everyone else seems fine with Sam and Greg. It seems to be mostly the other directors causing the clown show - "Quora CEO Adam D'Angelo, technology entrepreneur Tasha McCauley, and Georgetown Center for Security and Emerging Technology's Helen Toner"

mcmcmc 3y ago
Well there’s a significant difference in the board’s incentives. They don’t have any financial stake in the company. The whole point of the non-profit governance structure is so they can put ethics and mission over profits and market share.

moffkalast 3y ago

> the entire operation is a clown show The most organized and professional silicon valley startup.

averageRoyalty 3y ago

> the "brand" is absolutely and irrevocably tainted by this situation regardless of the outcome. The majority of people don't know or care about this. Branding is only impacted within the tech world, who are already criticial of OpenAI.