4 ms·

Title says: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired. They're unconvinced and furious. Some breaking news: An employer does

• vikingbeast 3y ago
  Weird take in this context. Nearly all of the company has threatened to walk out and join Microsoft.
  • x86x87 3y ago
    hah. these people obviously have not worked for Microsoft. You need to remember why this tech emerged in a place like OpenAI and not MS or Google. The structure and the politics of a big corporation are not conducive to cutting edge tech. They may go to Microsoft, but they will not be able to innovate in the same way and will probably fall into irrelevance in the long run.
    • ben_w 3y ago
      In the long run everything reverts to the mean. In the timescale of normal software developer tenure, they could all join MS, then get 300% turnover, and still have nearly the same culture.
    • yellow_postit 3y ago
      I’d bet a bunch actually have at either Google, Microsoft or Meta Research. Microsoft’s had an ok track record recently of letting acquisitions stay pretty independent. The atrophy and cultural reversion to the mean of a large corporation will still happen, but at a slower pace. If I were Microsoft I’d also look at making it easy to get investment from folks leaving soon after the acquisition through their investment arm.
    • t-writescode 3y ago
      Are you familiar with Microsoft Research? It's literally a section of the company that is given basically free reign to do "stuff" in hopes that maybe, possibly, it might someday see the light of day or be impactful. Here's an example of some of their work: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Microsoft+Research+four+color+theorum&t=ffab&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Microsoft+Research+four+color+theo... Literally a random math problem, basically nothing to do with Microsoft on the surface ... except that the scientist working on it happened to prove the theorum using a very, very robust algorithm and then wrote a proof program on top of it to prove the program was correct. The underlying parts of that proof program eventually went on to become the thing that validates graphics drivers on Windows ... 7 and beyond? My memory is fuzzy about "how it ended up being useful at Microsoft" part. But yeah, MSR does random stuff.
• mbernstein 3y ago
  Most individuals aren't essential, and no one would prioritize them. However, a company is successful due to the individuals that work within. When 700 out of 770 employees in quite frankly the hottest startup in the world band together and threaten to leave (and join Microsoft) if they aren't given an appropriate explanation, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks an employer owes an employee. Implying otherwise is absurd. If ~91% of the employees leave OpenAI, they will not be fine. That is delusional.
  • x86x87 3y ago
    do you believe they will be fine if nobody leaves? can this be business as usual moving forward? also if I learned anything over the years is that "threatening to quit" != "quitting".
    • kaiokendev 3y ago
      > "threatening to quit" != "quitting" Maybe, but being told they can freely jump ship to the new team at Microsoft, alongside the fact that their upcoming shares are most definitely going to lose most of their value as a result of losing key talent and pissing off their main compute provider certainly sweeten the deal
• fullshark 3y ago
  Other breaking news: Treating your employees like garbage is a dumb way to run a business, especially in an emerging industry where you are racing trillion dollar corporations to market and those employees are literally inventing your product.
  • x86x87 3y ago
    no disagreement here. but the reality is that employees are treated like garbage all the time. yes it is dumb. yes it leads to losing employees. yes, it should not be normalized.
• maxbond 3y ago
  The truth is in-between, if a company tells you you're valuable or even irreplaceable they're buttering you up. Thank them but try not to let it go to your head, if the wind changes you can end up under the bus. But a powerful brand really can collapse overnight if 90%+ of employees leave. We're seeing some odd bedfellows here, between the C-levels and VCs in closed door meetings and employees acting collectively. Normally these groups would be at odds, but today they're pulling together. Life is strange.
  • x86x87 3y ago
    the question I have is: how much of this is really happening and how much of this is a narrative fabricated to match a desired outcome by the side with the best PR? It's really hard to understand now and we will probably learn way more details once things cool down.
    • maxbond 3y ago
      Agreed, things are very much up in the air. I certainly wouldn't pretend to know what's to come, and wouldn't be shocked to learn that the threats to quit en masse have been overstated.
    • tsunamifury 3y ago
      Don’t confuse the lizards who know how to take advantage of chaos with a pre planned conspiracy
• alwaysrunning 3y ago
  As an employee I want to know that the board/execs/c suite are doing a good job and their decisions align with the companies stated goals. If they are not then it is time to start looking for a new job so that I don't end up in a bad situation financially.
  • x86x87 3y ago
    It depends. If you are seeing your job more than just a means to an ends maybe. If you see it as transactional and you need the company to stay in business while you work there why would you bother looking for a new job?
    • cpncrunch 3y ago
      If the company is prepared to make up a BS reason to fire the CEO, do you really want to bet on them looking after you? I would guess that most of the people working at openai could get a job anywhere.
      • x86x87 3y ago
        most people working at openai are subject to the same harsh market conditions everyone is. also, do you really care that the CEO was fired as long as you are getting payed what it was agreed upon when you got hired and you are doing interesting work?
        • defrost 3y ago
          > do you really care that the CEO was fired as long as you are getting payed what it was agreed upon ... I can't speak to the mood of specific staff at OpenAI but as to the question in general; Hell yeah to the Nth degree. I'm 60, I've had a long career and have been through two instances of companies falling out at the board level. I've onboarded at various projects because I cared about the projects and work that'd I would be doing and because I was more or less in line with the direction being taken and the people I worked with and those setting the course. When the board and C level start having a messy relationship and divorce it matters very much which side of the split I go with or whether I just up stakes and move on elsewhere. Pay alone isn't worth putting up with dysfunction from above or falling in line with a faction you never especially aligned with.
• Sai_ 3y ago
  Seems very feudal, serfdom mindset to accept that your employer doesn't owe you an explanation. An employment is a contract which both parties enter into willingly. Termination of contract deserves some level of empathetic glad handling, however minimal. It's just game theory - if you plan to hire again, you have to be gracious while firing someone because word gets around.
  • x86x87 3y ago
    In theory yes fully agree. If you look at how corporations are behaving in today's market it's not even close. It's at will employment (At least in US in most places) - you are not owed an explanation and you don't owe an explanation.
• Uehreka 3y ago
  > An employer does not owe you an explanation. If the entire workforce of the company is credibly threatening to quit, and a competitor is publicly and credibly offering them jobs, then what the employer “owes” them in some cosmic sense no longer matters. I think the OpenAI employees are likely to get an explanation and/or a resignation from the board, whether you think the board “owes” them that or not.
• 6gvONxR4sf7o 3y ago
  Well here's the power of collective action in play.