3 ms·

> The boardroom coup at OpenAI really might have been, at least in part, about the board’s literal fears of AI apocalypse. The AI doomers delivered OpenAI in M

> The boardroom coup at OpenAI really might have been, at least in part, about the board’s literal fears of AI apocalypse. The AI doomers delivered OpenAI in Microsoft's lap for free all in the name of protecting us from the evils of AI. The ironing. But it shows most of OpenAI doesn't really value safety first, if 500 of them are ready to jump ship. They are just as eager as anyone else to see AGI happening, with them being at the top of the wave, no matter the consequences. We can't expect MS to hire them under the same idealistic charter as OpenAI.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> The AI doomers delivered OpenAI in Microsoft's lap for free all in the name of protecting us from the evils of AI. AI doomers are the entire reason for OpenAI existing, though its been clear for a while that a sizable fraction of that at OpenAI has been for PR show, not any real coherent concern. What surprised me in the breakup is the indication that there was apparently more than one person involved for whom it wasn't either cynical deception or empty affectation, but enough to actual make substantive, decisions based on. Doesn't surprise me that, though, that the faction that took it seriously, despite apparently being able to swing a majority of the board, found itself completely overwhelmed by the other side, even after the initial top-level purge, when it came to executive suite of the nominally-for-funding-the-nonprofit-but-funded-by-Microsoft-for-Microsoft's-benefit for-profit LLC, and likely by the "we paid you largely with profit sharing in a firm that we openly say we won't focus on making a profit, but which clearly Microsoft was funding on the expectation of a profit" tech team when they made it clear that they were serious and not just for playing a PR game about the for-profit being subordinated to the nonprofit's mission and not focused on profit.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  > What surprised me in the breakup is the indication that there was apparently more than one person involved for whom it wasn't either cynical deception or empty affectation, but enough to actual make substantive, decisions based on. Or, potentially, to use their presence on the board of OpenAI to harm OpenAI whilst at the same time increasing the standing of their own product. That conflict of interest is a very ugly one in my opinion and I would not be at all surprised if after all of the smoke has cleared that turns out to have been the driving factor all along. Ilya comes across as wanting to position himself as a useful idiot at this point (which may be true, false or a half truth, I just don't know).
whatshisface 3y ago
I can only imagine this chief scientist guy's horror when he realized that none of the people accepting multi-million equity compensation packages for a job to pursue AGI ethically were more concerned about the ethics they emphasized in the interview than the millions of dollars in equity backed by Altman's prolific dealmaking. In some ways it is tragic because his mistake seems like it came as a result of thinking that the rules were actually the rules (in that the board controlled the non-profit, and that their decisions would be seen as legitimate,) and also that he wasn't surrounded by people who were only going along with his philosophy because of the money that his move seriously threatened.
- hotnfresh 3y ago
  “You mean they lied when I asked them why they wanted to work here? Like 99.9% of all times that question has been asked in history? I’m shocked!”
- jacquesm 3y ago
  I see a serious lack of street smarts. Of course the money will matter. Enough people would sell their grandmothers for that kind of cash the rules be damned. To believe that you have a few hundred altruistic people for whom the compensation is an afterthought is some next level wishful thinking.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
OhNoNotAgain_99 3y ago
[dead]
moralestapia 3y ago
I'm a firm believer that greed triumphs over any other possible explanation about why things happen to be the way they are (not that I like it but true is true). So, I'm not surprised in the least that most OpenAI's (and everywhere else's) engineers follow the most profitable path. It's a delusion to think that the creation of an AGI is something that could be prevented, or that it could be prevented so easily (by firing @sama, lol). The box is already open, and sooner or later somebody out in the world will witness the emergence of a superintelligence in front of its eyes. This is something that, for all practical purposes, needs to be accepted as a fact, so that appropriate measures to deal with it could come up as well. So, being a bit generous to the OpenAI people, if AGI is going to happen anyway, they might better profit off it while also trying to steer things towards what they think is good, after all, they're presumably "the good guys".
- polishdude20 3y ago
  I don't think it's greed to want to raise a family in a good neighborhood and provide your children with opportunities. Or pay for your parents medical appointments. Or not want to work well into your 80's. If that's greed then everyone is "greedy".
  - tomatocracy 3y ago
    Perhaps a better phrase is "self-interest".
  - throw_pm23 3y ago
    What is funny is that in 2023 to achieve that basic standard you describe, you need to invent AGI along the way.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> The AI doomers delivered OpenAI in Microsoft's lap for free all in the name of protecting us from the evils of AI. AI doomers are the entire reason for OpenAI existing, though its been clear for a while that a sizable fraction of that at OpenAI has been for PR show, not any real coherent concern. What surprised me in the breakup is the indication that there was apparently more than one person involved for whom it wasn't either cynical deception or empty affectation, but enough to actual make substantive, decisions based on. Doesn't surprise me that, though, that the faction that took it seriously, despite apparently being able to swing a majority of the board, found itself completely overwhelmed by the other side, even after the initial top-level purge, when it came to executive suite of the nominally-for-funding-the-nonprofit-but-funded-by-Microsoft-for-Microsoft's-benefit for-profit LLC, and likely by the "we paid you largely with profit sharing in a firm that we openly say we won't focus on making a profit, but which clearly Microsoft was funding on the expectation of a profit" tech team when they made it clear that they were serious and not just for playing a PR game about the for-profit being subordinated to the nonprofit's mission and not focused on profit.

jacquesm 3y ago
> What surprised me in the breakup is the indication that there was apparently more than one person involved for whom it wasn't either cynical deception or empty affectation, but enough to actual make substantive, decisions based on. Or, potentially, to use their presence on the board of OpenAI to harm OpenAI whilst at the same time increasing the standing of their own product. That conflict of interest is a very ugly one in my opinion and I would not be at all surprised if after all of the smoke has cleared that turns out to have been the driving factor all along. Ilya comes across as wanting to position himself as a useful idiot at this point (which may be true, false or a half truth, I just don't know).

whatshisface 3y ago

I can only imagine this chief scientist guy's horror when he realized that none of the people accepting multi-million equity compensation packages for a job to pursue AGI ethically were more concerned about the ethics they emphasized in the interview than the millions of dollars in equity backed by Altman's prolific dealmaking. In some ways it is tragic because his mistake seems like it came as a result of thinking that the rules were actually the rules (in that the board controlled the non-profit, and that their decisions would be seen as legitimate,) and also that he wasn't surrounded by people who were only going along with his philosophy because of the money that his move seriously threatened.

hotnfresh 3y ago
“You mean they lied when I asked them why they wanted to work here? Like 99.9% of all times that question has been asked in history? I’m shocked!”
jacquesm 3y ago
I see a serious lack of street smarts. Of course the money will matter. Enough people would sell their grandmothers for that kind of cash the rules be damned. To believe that you have a few hundred altruistic people for whom the compensation is an afterthought is some next level wishful thinking.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

OhNoNotAgain_99 3y ago

[dead]

moralestapia 3y ago

I'm a firm believer that greed triumphs over any other possible explanation about why things happen to be the way they are (not that I like it but true is true). So, I'm not surprised in the least that most OpenAI's (and everywhere else's) engineers follow the most profitable path. It's a delusion to think that the creation of an AGI is something that could be prevented, or that it could be prevented so easily (by firing @sama, lol). The box is already open, and sooner or later somebody out in the world will witness the emergence of a superintelligence in front of its eyes. This is something that, for all practical purposes, needs to be accepted as a fact, so that appropriate measures to deal with it could come up as well. So, being a bit generous to the OpenAI people, if AGI is going to happen anyway, they might better profit off it while also trying to steer things towards what they think is good, after all, they're presumably "the good guys".

polishdude20 3y ago
I don't think it's greed to want to raise a family in a good neighborhood and provide your children with opportunities. Or pay for your parents medical appointments. Or not want to work well into your 80's. If that's greed then everyone is "greedy".
- tomatocracy 3y ago
  Perhaps a better phrase is "self-interest".
- throw_pm23 3y ago
  What is funny is that in 2023 to achieve that basic standard you describe, you need to invent AGI along the way.