4 ms·

If nobody is willing to put their names on those statements then there is absolutely zero reason to believe it is anything other than one of their competitors t

If nobody is willing to put their names on those statements then there is absolutely zero reason to believe it is anything other than one of their competitors trying to take advantage of an opportune time to weaken the forerunner. This is worthless and shouldn't be on the HN homepage.

dmitrygr 3y ago
Putting your name on something like this would make you unemployable anywhere, whether this is true or false. It makes perfect sense that nobody would do so.
croes 3y ago
By that logic whistleblower would be worthless too.
- SirensOfTitan 3y ago
  Journalists who work with whistleblowers typically validate that the person in question is reliable and is who they say they are. How do we know this was written by former employees? This, honestly, feels like it ought to be removed. It is not a reliable letter without names or some kind of verification, just a random post on a website.
  - croes 3y ago
    It's as valid as all the other articles with assumptions what is happening at OpenAI. It a starting point for others for digging deeper and either prove or disprove the claims
airstrike 3y ago
> Contact > We encourage former OpenAI employees to contact us at formerly_openai@mail2tor.com. We personally guarantee everyone's anonymity in any internal deliberations and public communications. Sounds like they're just being intentionally protective of everyone's identities, which is understandable. Also "shouldn't be on the HN homepage" is not really a pertinent comment, seeing as it is on the front page, meaning others (via the algorithm) do think it is a worthy submission.
- jader201 3y ago
  > Also "shouldn't be on the HN homepage" is not really a pertinent comment, seeing as it is on the front page, meaning others (via the algorithm) do think it is a worthy submission. I would argue that, as in a lot of cases with articles that appear on the FP, this one may be getting upvoted as folks are around for the discussion, not necessarily the featured article, as it's just "another clue" as to what the heck is going on with this circus show.
  - airstrike 3y ago
    That may very well be the case, but even then there's no reason to disallow it from the front page necessarily. Let readers make their own judgement about whether it's genuine. Heck, that's an interesting discussion in and of itself.
    - jader201 3y ago
      > Let readers make their own judgement about whether it's genuine. Looks like they have -- it's been flagged (but not by me -- I'm not informed enough about this to make that kind of call).
      - airstrike 3y ago
        I noticed, but sadly we can't vouch for submissions, which means only the `flag`s count, so it's not exactly a fair fight
        greyface- 3y ago
        I think vouching only becomes available when it's [dead], not merely when [flagged].
- BoiledCabbage 3y ago
  This is unauthenticated, unverified, anonymous. There is an enormous difference between journalism and this. Anyone reading this thread right now can post any random text to a website and claim to be a former employee. Anyone can make up anything at all. Are all of those content that should be on the homepage? They would be up voted. Credibility is important when making accusations, accountability is important. There is zero here. There are processes for actual whistle-blowers. This isn't it. It's worse than "yellow journalism". And it's concerning people don't see the difference.
baq 3y ago
Read about what happens to whistleblowers who aren't anonymous pretty much anywhere in any industry. Not pretty.
shmatt 3y ago
> OpenAI's employee attrition rate between January 2018 and July 2020 was in the order of 50%. and > Those who questioned this practice were dismissed as "bad culture fits" and even terminated, some just before Thanksgiving 2019. Would be pretty easy to verify, and could be concerning (mostly the 50% part)
- xena 3y ago
  A 50% attrition rate is worse than fast food hourly work.
  - jeffwiederkehr 3y ago
    I managed fast food restaurants prior to becoming a SWE and our target turnover was 130% annually so not quite to that level.
- FormerBandmate 3y ago
  OpenAI went through at least one purge, Musk founded it but famously is no longer associated with it. There’s a huge amount of board turnover, it would be interesting to see the causes behind that
- nickff 3y ago
  A median tenure of 2.5 years seems pretty good, compared to those employees likes other options; Amazon's average is only one year. https://amazonbound.medium.com/why-amazons-attrition-is-higher-than-attrition-at-other-tech-companies-b0de9cb2c4fe https://amazonbound.medium.com/why-amazons-attrition-is-high...
hermannj314 3y ago
I got fiercely attacked the other day because i suggested it might be ok to host grandmas chicken pot pie recipe using HTTP. But then we turn around and accept as fact an anonymous document making serious accusations without proof of authenticity or tamper resistance as if it were gospel. I seriously have no idea what the rules are anymore.
- Freedom2 3y ago
  dang is usually receptive - if you reach out to him, he can usually provide more context regarding moderation actions here.
  - felipellrocha 3y ago
    He is receptive? Daaaaang... I'll see myself out...
bnralt 3y ago
OpenAI has been around for 8 years and has hundreds of employees. So it would be surprising if there wasn't at least some ex-employees somewhere that had chips on their shoulders, either for valid or completely invalid reasons. The letter is anonymous, so we have no way of knowing if it's 1 or 2 people or 100. As such, the letter is fairly useless. I'd say the number of employees openly standing with Altman is a much more important data point.

dmitrygr 3y ago

Putting your name on something like this would make you unemployable anywhere, whether this is true or false. It makes perfect sense that nobody would do so.

croes 3y ago

By that logic whistleblower would be worthless too.

SirensOfTitan 3y ago
Journalists who work with whistleblowers typically validate that the person in question is reliable and is who they say they are. How do we know this was written by former employees? This, honestly, feels like it ought to be removed. It is not a reliable letter without names or some kind of verification, just a random post on a website.
- croes 3y ago
  It's as valid as all the other articles with assumptions what is happening at OpenAI. It a starting point for others for digging deeper and either prove or disprove the claims

airstrike 3y ago

> Contact > We encourage former OpenAI employees to contact us at formerly_openai@mail2tor.com. We personally guarantee everyone's anonymity in any internal deliberations and public communications. Sounds like they're just being intentionally protective of everyone's identities, which is understandable. Also "shouldn't be on the HN homepage" is not really a pertinent comment, seeing as it is on the front page, meaning others (via the algorithm) do think it is a worthy submission.

jader201 3y ago
> Also "shouldn't be on the HN homepage" is not really a pertinent comment, seeing as it is on the front page, meaning others (via the algorithm) do think it is a worthy submission. I would argue that, as in a lot of cases with articles that appear on the FP, this one may be getting upvoted as folks are around for the discussion, not necessarily the featured article, as it's just "another clue" as to what the heck is going on with this circus show.
- airstrike 3y ago
  That may very well be the case, but even then there's no reason to disallow it from the front page necessarily. Let readers make their own judgement about whether it's genuine. Heck, that's an interesting discussion in and of itself.
  - jader201 3y ago
    > Let readers make their own judgement about whether it's genuine. Looks like they have -- it's been flagged (but not by me -- I'm not informed enough about this to make that kind of call).
    - airstrike 3y ago
      I noticed, but sadly we can't vouch for submissions, which means only the `flag`s count, so it's not exactly a fair fight
      - greyface- 3y ago
        I think vouching only becomes available when it's [dead], not merely when [flagged].
BoiledCabbage 3y ago
This is unauthenticated, unverified, anonymous. There is an enormous difference between journalism and this. Anyone reading this thread right now can post any random text to a website and claim to be a former employee. Anyone can make up anything at all. Are all of those content that should be on the homepage? They would be up voted. Credibility is important when making accusations, accountability is important. There is zero here. There are processes for actual whistle-blowers. This isn't it. It's worse than "yellow journalism". And it's concerning people don't see the difference.

baq 3y ago

Read about what happens to whistleblowers who aren't anonymous pretty much anywhere in any industry. Not pretty.

shmatt 3y ago

> OpenAI's employee attrition rate between January 2018 and July 2020 was in the order of 50%. and > Those who questioned this practice were dismissed as "bad culture fits" and even terminated, some just before Thanksgiving 2019. Would be pretty easy to verify, and could be concerning (mostly the 50% part)

xena 3y ago
A 50% attrition rate is worse than fast food hourly work.
- jeffwiederkehr 3y ago
  I managed fast food restaurants prior to becoming a SWE and our target turnover was 130% annually so not quite to that level.
FormerBandmate 3y ago
OpenAI went through at least one purge, Musk founded it but famously is no longer associated with it. There’s a huge amount of board turnover, it would be interesting to see the causes behind that
nickff 3y ago
A median tenure of 2.5 years seems pretty good, compared to those employees likes other options; Amazon's average is only one year. https://amazonbound.medium.com/why-amazons-attrition-is-higher-than-attrition-at-other-tech-companies-b0de9cb2c4fe https://amazonbound.medium.com/why-amazons-attrition-is-high...

hermannj314 3y ago

I got fiercely attacked the other day because i suggested it might be ok to host grandmas chicken pot pie recipe using HTTP. But then we turn around and accept as fact an anonymous document making serious accusations without proof of authenticity or tamper resistance as if it were gospel. I seriously have no idea what the rules are anymore.

Freedom2 3y ago
dang is usually receptive - if you reach out to him, he can usually provide more context regarding moderation actions here.
- felipellrocha 3y ago
  He is receptive? Daaaaang... I'll see myself out...

bnralt 3y ago

OpenAI has been around for 8 years and has hundreds of employees. So it would be surprising if there wasn't at least some ex-employees somewhere that had chips on their shoulders, either for valid or completely invalid reasons. The letter is anonymous, so we have no way of knowing if it's 1 or 2 people or 100. As such, the letter is fairly useless. I'd say the number of employees openly standing with Altman is a much more important data point.