4 ms·

Or, rather, it’s odd that you haven’t heard what Sam did wrong. There was a front page Bloomberg article that alleges what Sam did and it was briefly in the top

Or, rather, it’s odd that you haven’t heard what Sam did wrong. There was a front page Bloomberg article that alleges what Sam did and it was briefly in the top of this site then disappeared. It alleged that Sam funneled a lot of money to his AI chip company startup.

althea_tx 3y ago
“Funneled money to the startup” or “fundraised for the startup?” There’s a world of difference between those two things.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- mediaman 3y ago
  Yes, all the reporting pointed to his attempts to raise money externally for an AI chip company, and specifically soliciting sovereign wealth funds. I could understand board concerns about him being spread too thin, but more chip competition would pretty clearly benefit OpenAI as a large consumer of GPU chips, and this is very different than any sort of allegation around mishandling of funds (which has been ruled out by several people anyway).
  - JackFr 3y ago
    From the initial board release, the issue then was not necessarily the fundraising or him being spread too thin, but rather that he was not forthright with the board. Every CEO manages the board to some extent and paints a picture for them, but if significant, material information about strategy and operations is being purposely withheld from the board, they cannot do their job.
  - HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
    OpenAI is/was critically partnered with Microsoft, using NVidia-based Azure for compute to the benefit of both. There certainly appears to be a conflict of interest in Altman trying to create an NVidia competitor, and proliferation of AI, and seeing as he was seeking middle eastern funds it also raises questions about US limits on export of AI tech.
- marricks 3y ago
  I was paraphrasing what I remember of the blurb of the article. I probably should have used fundraising, though.
swyx 3y ago
“attempted to raise” is not the same as “funneled”, which connotes actual fraud. you discredit yourself by being imprecise.
robocat 3y ago
> AI chip company startup It appears Sam has joined Microsoft instead. So perhaps it wasn't actually much of a real deal.

althea_tx 3y ago

“Funneled money to the startup” or “fundraised for the startup?” There’s a world of difference between those two things.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
mediaman 3y ago
Yes, all the reporting pointed to his attempts to raise money externally for an AI chip company, and specifically soliciting sovereign wealth funds. I could understand board concerns about him being spread too thin, but more chip competition would pretty clearly benefit OpenAI as a large consumer of GPU chips, and this is very different than any sort of allegation around mishandling of funds (which has been ruled out by several people anyway).
- JackFr 3y ago
  From the initial board release, the issue then was not necessarily the fundraising or him being spread too thin, but rather that he was not forthright with the board. Every CEO manages the board to some extent and paints a picture for them, but if significant, material information about strategy and operations is being purposely withheld from the board, they cannot do their job.
- HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
  OpenAI is/was critically partnered with Microsoft, using NVidia-based Azure for compute to the benefit of both. There certainly appears to be a conflict of interest in Altman trying to create an NVidia competitor, and proliferation of AI, and seeing as he was seeking middle eastern funds it also raises questions about US limits on export of AI tech.
marricks 3y ago
I was paraphrasing what I remember of the blurb of the article. I probably should have used fundraising, though.

swyx 3y ago

“attempted to raise” is not the same as “funneled”, which connotes actual fraud. you discredit yourself by being imprecise.

robocat 3y ago

> AI chip company startup It appears Sam has joined Microsoft instead. So perhaps it wasn't actually much of a real deal.