6 ms·

It's not reported as much as it should be, but at one point in 2021 the OpenAI board had 10 people on it. In the beginning of 2023 it had 9 people. 3 stepped

It's not reported as much as it should be, but at one point in 2021 the OpenAI board had 10 people on it. In the beginning of 2023 it had 9 people. 3 stepped down over the course of 2023 and were not replaced, leaving only 6 in place by the time of last week's fiasco. 2 of the 6 were then removed on Friday leaving 4. The typical large company will have 10-12 people on the board. Apparently, OpenAI's bylaws do not set a fixed size for the board and allow the board itself to elect and remove members and allows a simple majority to take any action without even requiring a formal meeting. It's a glaring failure of governance that OpenAI now has a 4 person board that seems split and paralyzed over what to do next. The path forward has to include not only all 4 of the current board members resigning but a change in bylaws to establish a larger board with a balance of insiders and outsiders and much clearer operating procedures.

jacquesm 3y ago
> Apparently, OpenAI's bylaws do not set a fixed size for the board and allow the board itself to elect and remove members and allows a simple majority to take any action without even requiring a formal meeting. For their sake I do hope they read the bylaws and that your 'apparently' doesn't come back to haunt them because then they are in even more trouble. > The path forward has to include not only all 4 of the current board members resigning but a change in bylaws to establish a larger board with a balance of insiders and outsiders and much clearer operating procedures. Amen to that. It might even end with the removal of the oversight board and the whole non-profit construct.
- DebtDeflation 3y ago
  If not removal then at least a clear split into two separate (for-profit and non-profit) entities with no parent-sub relationship. Then have an agreement where the for-profit entity commits to a specified funding level for the non-profit in exchange for a license to commercially use/resell the IP.
ChatGTP 3y ago
This is the type of thing Microsoft should known about before investing, billions in the company. They are crying foul now and it might work out ok. But they were asking for it.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Well, you are putting a lower bound on the incompetence at the board. But I wouldn't bet on them being that familiar with the bylaws.
TMWNN 3y ago
>It's not reported as much as it should be, but at one point in 2021 the OpenAI board had 10 people on it. In the beginning of 2023 it had 9 people. 3 stepped down over the course of 2023 and were not replaced, leaving only 6 in place by the time of last week's fiasco. Something bothered me when I read the board members' bios after Altman's firing but didn't figure out until today; it's not so much what they say, as much as what they don't say. There is no greybeard, some seasoned current/former C-level at another company (no, the CEO of Quora does not quality). There is no VC representative. My question: Did the board ever have such people? (I realize that OpenAI has this weird nonprofit/profit ownership arrangement which I still don't get, and that the VC board members/observers are presumably on the profit side, but that still doesn't answer the implied question!)

jacquesm 3y ago

> Apparently, OpenAI's bylaws do not set a fixed size for the board and allow the board itself to elect and remove members and allows a simple majority to take any action without even requiring a formal meeting. For their sake I do hope they read the bylaws and that your 'apparently' doesn't come back to haunt them because then they are in even more trouble. > The path forward has to include not only all 4 of the current board members resigning but a change in bylaws to establish a larger board with a balance of insiders and outsiders and much clearer operating procedures. Amen to that. It might even end with the removal of the oversight board and the whole non-profit construct.

DebtDeflation 3y ago
If not removal then at least a clear split into two separate (for-profit and non-profit) entities with no parent-sub relationship. Then have an agreement where the for-profit entity commits to a specified funding level for the non-profit in exchange for a license to commercially use/resell the IP.

ChatGTP 3y ago

This is the type of thing Microsoft should known about before investing, billions in the company. They are crying foul now and it might work out ok. But they were asking for it.

jacquesm 3y ago
Well, you are putting a lower bound on the incompetence at the board. But I wouldn't bet on them being that familiar with the bylaws.

TMWNN 3y ago

>It's not reported as much as it should be, but at one point in 2021 the OpenAI board had 10 people on it. In the beginning of 2023 it had 9 people. 3 stepped down over the course of 2023 and were not replaced, leaving only 6 in place by the time of last week's fiasco. Something bothered me when I read the board members' bios after Altman's firing but didn't figure out until today; it's not so much what they say, as much as what they don't say. There is no greybeard, some seasoned current/former C-level at another company (no, the CEO of Quora does not quality). There is no VC representative. My question: Did the board ever have such people? (I realize that OpenAI has this weird nonprofit/profit ownership arrangement which I still don't get, and that the VC board members/observers are presumably on the profit side, but that still doesn't answer the implied question!)