4 ms·
Satya on twitter: We are encouraged by the changes to the OpenAI board. We believe this is a first essential step on a path to more stable, well-informed, and
by gzer0 3y ago
Satya on twitter:
We are encouraged by the changes to the OpenAI board. We believe this is a first essential step on a path to more stable, well-informed, and effective governance. Sam, Greg, and I have talked and agreed they have a key role to play along with the OAI leadership team in ensuring OAI continues to thrive and build on its mission. We look forward to building on our strong partnership and delivering the value of this next generation of AI to our customers and partners.
https://twitter.com/satyanadella/status/1727207661547233721 https://twitter.com/satyanadella/status/1727207661547233721
- qsi 3y ago>> a first essential step on a path to more stable, well-informed, and effective governance. That's quite a slap at the board... a polite way of calling them ignorant, ineffective dilettantes.
- adastra22 3y agoYet one of them is still on the board…
- estomagordo 3y agoNot sure why that would be contradictory.
- adastra22 3y agoWell then there’s still a “ignorant, ineffective dilettante“ making up 1/3 of the board.
- estomagordo 3y agoFirstly, maybe don't put quotes around an unrelated party's representation of the board. Secondly, the board was made up of individuals and naturally, what might be true for the board as a whole does not apply to every individual on it.
- adastra22 3y agoI don’t understand this comment. I’m quoting from this thread, from the post that I was responding to. What do you think I was talking about?
- qsi 3y agoI don't understand that either, but let's see what the board looks like in a few months/weeks/days/hours?
- sanxiyn 3y agoOld board needs to agree to new board, so I think some compromise is inevitable.
- qsi 3y agoIf all members of the old board resign simultaneously, what happens then? No more old board to agree to any new members. In a for-profit the shareholders can elect new board members, but in this case I don't know how it's supposed to work.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ilikehurdles 3y agoI've been privy to this happening at a nonprofit board. Depends on charter, but I've seen the old board tender their resignation and remain responsible only to vote for the appointment of their (usually interim to start) replacements. Normally in a nonprofit (not here), the membership of that nonprofit still has to ratify the new board in some kind of annual meeting; but in the meantime, the interim board can start making executive decisions about the org.
- remarkEon 3y agoD'Angelo? Wonder if this is a signal that the theories about Poe are off the mark.
- adastra22 3y agoDoesn’t matter. It’s an absolutely clear conflict of interest. It may have taken an unrelated shakeup for people to notice (or maybe D’Angelo was critically involved; we don’t know), but there’s no way he should be staying on this board.
- BillyTheKing 3y agomaybe it's just going to be easier to fire him in a second step once this current situation which seems to be primarily about ideology is cleared up. In D’Angelo's case it's going to be easier to just point to a clear traditional conflict of interest down the line
- rlt 3y agoThe one (Adam D’Angelo) who’s a cofounder and CEO of a company (Quora) that has a product (Poe) that arguably competes with OpenAI’s “GPTs” feature, no less. I don’t understand why that’s not a conflict of interest? But honestly both products pale in comparison to OpenAI’s underlying models’ importance.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> I don’t understand why that’s not a conflict of interest? It's not the conflict of interest it would be if it was the board of a for profit corporation that was basically identical to the existing for-profit LLC but without the lyaers above it ending with the nonprofit that the board actually runs, because OpenAI is not a normal company, and making profit is not its purpose, so the CEO of a company that happens to have a product in the same space as the LLC is not in a fundamental conflict of interest (there may be some specific decisions it would make sense for him to recuse from for conflict reasons, but there is a difference between "may have a conflict regarding certain decisions" and "has a fundamental conflict incompatible with sitting on the board".) Its not a conflict for a nonprofit that raises money with craft faires to have someone who runs a for-profit periodic craft faire in the same market on its board. It is a conflict for a for profit corporation whose business is running such a craft faire to do so, though.
- adastra22 3y agoStill a conflict of interest. If D’Angelo has financial incentive to want OpenAI to fail, then this at odds with his duty to follow the OpenAI charter. It’s exactly why two of the previous board members left earlier this year.
- ah765 3y agoNo one really knows who was responsible for what. But Sam agreed to this deal over the Microsoft alternative, so probably Adam isn't that bad.
- behnamoh 3y agoMaybe the other two left if Adam would remain.
- _jnc 3y agomicrosoft is going to need 2-3 seats on that board
- choppaface 3y agoLarry Summers mostly counts as a Microsoft seat. Summers will support commercial and private interest and not have a single thought about safety, just like during the financial crisis 15 years ago https://www.chronicle.com/article/larry-summers-and-the-subversion-of-economics/ https://www.chronicle.com/article/larry-summers-and-the-subv...
- astrange 3y agoLarry Summers hurt the US economy by making the recovery from 2008 much too slow. If they'd done stimulus better, we could've had 2019's economic growth years earlier. That would've been great for Microsoft.
- wokwokwok 3y agoUnsaid: “Also I lied about hiring him.” > And we’re extremely excited to share the news that Sam Altman and Greg Brockman, together with colleagues, will be joining Microsoft to lead a new advanced AI research team. https://nitter.net/satyanadella/status/1726509045803336122 https://nitter.net/satyanadella/status/1726509045803336122 I guess everyone was just playing a bit loose and fast with the truth and hype to pressure the board.
- Nathanba 3y agomaybe he really had an affirmative statement on this from Sam Altman but nobody signs an employment contract this quickly so it was all still up in the air
- vikramkr 3y agoAlso even if he signed it he's allowed to quit? Like, the 14th amendment exists y'all. And especially if after that agreement 90+ percent of openai threatens to quit, that's a different situation than the situation 10 minutes before that announcement so why wouldn't they change their decision?
- behnamoh 3y agoit was Monday morning and he didn’t want MSFT stock to crash
- robbomacrae 3y agoWhy does this accusation keep coming up? Sam even confirmed he took the offer in one of the tweets above "when i decided to join msft on sun evening". Contracts are not handcuffs and he was free to change his mind.
- century19 3y agoExactly this. It also moved Microsoft’s share price. Is that not questionable practice?
- Roark66 3y ago
- forrestthewoods 3y agoDid Satya get played with the whole "Sam and Greg are joining Microsoft"? Was Satya in on a gambit to get the whole company to threaten to quit to force the board's hand? It sure feels like a bad look for Satya to announce a huge hire Sunday night and then this? But what do I know. Edit: don't know why the downvotes. You're welcome to think it's an obviously smart political move. That it's win/win either way. But it's a very fair question that every tech blogger on the planet will be trying to answer for the next month!
- voidfunc 3y agoHuh? Satyas move was politically brilliant. Either outcome of Sama returning to OpenAI or Sama going to Microsoft is good for Microsoft as continuity and progress are the most important things right now for Microsoft. An OpenAI in turmoil would have been worthless. Satyas maneuvering gave Sama huge leverage.
- behnamoh 3y agoand yet microsoft has no seat on the board.
- robbomacrae 3y agoThe board is not finalized. There will most likely be more seats and Microsoft will probably have at least one.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- altpaddle 3y agoI think it was mostly a bluff to try the pressure the board. I don't think Sam and most of Open AI rank and file would want to be employees of MSFT
- i67vw3 3y agoAlso to lessen the MSFT share impact.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]