6 ms·

I can believe the staff likes or even loves him, but the following him part was mostly because of money/shares and because they know he's influential and well c

I can believe the staff likes or even loves him, but the following him part was mostly because of money/shares and because they know he's influential and well connected to people with money. And peer pressure may have had a part in that letter signing. You don't want to be on the side of the losers if Altman gets his way.

Kiro 3y ago
> mostly because of money/shares How do you know?
- imjonse 3y ago
  I don't obviously. But since those people were ready to jump ship to Microsoft, I am pretty sure they care more about their own careers than 'creating AGI that benefits humanity as a whole in the first place'
  - 93po 3y ago
    Presumably they're jumping ship with Sam, and I'd assume that they'd assume that Sam would uphold the same perceived integrity at MS
    - imjonse 3y ago
      Sam's integrity would be at home at Microsoft, for sure.
      - 93po 3y ago
        keyword "perceived"
  - dnissley 3y ago
    Didn't most sign the letter before they knew they had any offer to join Microsoft in any capacity? Also maybe I'm just too risk averse but if I were concerned about money I wouldn't be putting my name on such a list. Although at some point past 50% it would feel pretty safe because what are they going to do, fire everyone?
    - dvfjsdhgfv 3y ago
      > Didn't most sign the letter before they knew they had any offer to join Microsoft in any capacity? I very much doubt it.
    - narag 3y ago
      "We, the undersigned, may choose to resign from OpenAI and join the newly announced Microsoft subsidiary..." so no, they knew.
- antisthenes 3y ago
  Occam's razor. Maybe the simplest explanation isn't the right one for 100% of the people that followed Sam (or were ready to), but it's the right one for 90% of them, which is what matters for practical purposes. Follow the money.
  - objektif 3y ago
    Of course. I mean come on you may love the guy but your primary reason for following him will still be money. Why would you want your years of work to go down to 0$?
  - dmix 3y ago
    These people are at the top of the AI industry, they’d make bank in a ton of jobs if they left tomorrow. They weren’t getting equity at Microsoft yet they still chose that opportunity as an alternative. Clearly they care about working on the most interesting AI around instead of continuing to work under a CEO and board whose whole plan is to cripple AI development. Both the interim CEO Shear and likely coup leader Toner made it clear they are anti-AI and want to slow progress. Toner specifically said she’d be okay with the company collapsing as that was in line with the charter. Occams Razor is people working on the most interesting stuff in the tech industry want to keep working on it rather than follow some radical EA doomer plan to kill it off well before we get near AGI.
    - rrdharan 3y ago
      > They weren’t getting equity at Microsoft This is wrong.
    - norir 3y ago
      > These people are at the top of the AI industry, they’d make bank in a ton of jobs if they left tomorrow. I know a signatory of the letter and I can assure you that they were nowhere near the top of the AI industry six months ago.
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        But being at OpenAI, they now probably have the reputation of belonging to the top.
ignoramous 3y ago
Memetic thinking aside, Ilya signing that letter might have sealed it for them. Though, working for someone as formidable as sama in itself is a great pull, nevertheless.
- bmitc 3y ago
  > working for someone as formidable as sama His name is Sam Altman. And why is he so formidable?
  - ignoramous 3y ago
    > And why is he so formidable? Commenting on an article that portrayed him as such? > His name is Sam Altman. Unsure what your point is; sama is his hn username.
    - bmitc 3y ago
      I don't know the usernames of people discussed in articles and prefer not referring to people colloquially. And I had assumed that you meant formidable in a positive sense. To me, he seems like a manipulative grifter. We even see that in his response to being fired. Instead of discussing facts, he was trying personal power plays, manipulating the media and employees, and trying to simultaneously start a new company, get a new job at Microsoft, and weasel back in as CEO of OpenAI. That seems to track as someone only concerned with himself. Through all of this, it has remained confusing and disturbing just why he is considered so important to any of this. He seems completely replaceable. I haven't ever read or heard anything from him that didn't seem to come from some startup 101 playbook, almost like a cosplayer.
      - ignoramous 3y ago
        > almost like a cosplayer If only growing startups were as easy as cosplay. > And I had assumed that you meant formidable in a positive sense Yes, I did. See also: https://twitter.com/karaswisher/status/1727386273936199893 https://twitter.com/karaswisher/status/1727386273936199893 > prefer not referring to people colloquially If not everyone, at least for hackernews participants with 12k+ karma, you'd think they'd know very well who runs hackernews, or used to.
jakderrida 3y ago
> but the following him part was mostly because of money/shares and because they know he's influential and well connected to people with money. In other words, they believed in his leadership, direction, and ability to serve their interests more than they believed in the board's. I don't understand why so many people are performing mental gymnastics attempting to turn the unanimous support behind him into somehow being evidence that he's the antichrist. Why wouldn't the employees act in their own self-interest? What's wrong with them acting in their own self-interest? I would assume all employees everywhere, more or less, act in their own self-interest and I don't think that makes them or their preferred leadership evil incarnate.
neilv 3y ago
The money vs. mission question was what I was trying to answer with this hypothetical polling: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38357485 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38357485 (It seems obvious that hitching your wagon to Mr. Altman probably has a much better chance of making you rich, than does playing harps on a cloud at an altruistic non-profit. The question is what you actually want.)

Kiro 3y ago

> mostly because of money/shares How do you know?

imjonse 3y ago
I don't obviously. But since those people were ready to jump ship to Microsoft, I am pretty sure they care more about their own careers than 'creating AGI that benefits humanity as a whole in the first place'
- 93po 3y ago
  Presumably they're jumping ship with Sam, and I'd assume that they'd assume that Sam would uphold the same perceived integrity at MS
  - imjonse 3y ago
    Sam's integrity would be at home at Microsoft, for sure.
    - 93po 3y ago
      keyword "perceived"
- dnissley 3y ago
  Didn't most sign the letter before they knew they had any offer to join Microsoft in any capacity? Also maybe I'm just too risk averse but if I were concerned about money I wouldn't be putting my name on such a list. Although at some point past 50% it would feel pretty safe because what are they going to do, fire everyone?
  - dvfjsdhgfv 3y ago
    > Didn't most sign the letter before they knew they had any offer to join Microsoft in any capacity? I very much doubt it.
  - narag 3y ago
    "We, the undersigned, may choose to resign from OpenAI and join the newly announced Microsoft subsidiary..." so no, they knew.
antisthenes 3y ago
Occam's razor. Maybe the simplest explanation isn't the right one for 100% of the people that followed Sam (or were ready to), but it's the right one for 90% of them, which is what matters for practical purposes. Follow the money.
- objektif 3y ago
  Of course. I mean come on you may love the guy but your primary reason for following him will still be money. Why would you want your years of work to go down to 0$?
- dmix 3y ago
  These people are at the top of the AI industry, they’d make bank in a ton of jobs if they left tomorrow. They weren’t getting equity at Microsoft yet they still chose that opportunity as an alternative. Clearly they care about working on the most interesting AI around instead of continuing to work under a CEO and board whose whole plan is to cripple AI development. Both the interim CEO Shear and likely coup leader Toner made it clear they are anti-AI and want to slow progress. Toner specifically said she’d be okay with the company collapsing as that was in line with the charter. Occams Razor is people working on the most interesting stuff in the tech industry want to keep working on it rather than follow some radical EA doomer plan to kill it off well before we get near AGI.
  - rrdharan 3y ago
    > They weren’t getting equity at Microsoft This is wrong.
  - norir 3y ago
    > These people are at the top of the AI industry, they’d make bank in a ton of jobs if they left tomorrow. I know a signatory of the letter and I can assure you that they were nowhere near the top of the AI industry six months ago.
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      But being at OpenAI, they now probably have the reputation of belonging to the top.

ignoramous 3y ago

Memetic thinking aside, Ilya signing that letter might have sealed it for them. Though, working for someone as formidable as sama in itself is a great pull, nevertheless.

bmitc 3y ago
> working for someone as formidable as sama His name is Sam Altman. And why is he so formidable?
- ignoramous 3y ago
  > And why is he so formidable? Commenting on an article that portrayed him as such? > His name is Sam Altman. Unsure what your point is; sama is his hn username.
  - bmitc 3y ago
    I don't know the usernames of people discussed in articles and prefer not referring to people colloquially. And I had assumed that you meant formidable in a positive sense. To me, he seems like a manipulative grifter. We even see that in his response to being fired. Instead of discussing facts, he was trying personal power plays, manipulating the media and employees, and trying to simultaneously start a new company, get a new job at Microsoft, and weasel back in as CEO of OpenAI. That seems to track as someone only concerned with himself. Through all of this, it has remained confusing and disturbing just why he is considered so important to any of this. He seems completely replaceable. I haven't ever read or heard anything from him that didn't seem to come from some startup 101 playbook, almost like a cosplayer.
    - ignoramous 3y ago
      > almost like a cosplayer If only growing startups were as easy as cosplay. > And I had assumed that you meant formidable in a positive sense Yes, I did. See also: https://twitter.com/karaswisher/status/1727386273936199893 https://twitter.com/karaswisher/status/1727386273936199893 > prefer not referring to people colloquially If not everyone, at least for hackernews participants with 12k+ karma, you'd think they'd know very well who runs hackernews, or used to.

jakderrida 3y ago

> but the following him part was mostly because of money/shares and because they know he's influential and well connected to people with money. In other words, they believed in his leadership, direction, and ability to serve their interests more than they believed in the board's. I don't understand why so many people are performing mental gymnastics attempting to turn the unanimous support behind him into somehow being evidence that he's the antichrist. Why wouldn't the employees act in their own self-interest? What's wrong with them acting in their own self-interest? I would assume all employees everywhere, more or less, act in their own self-interest and I don't think that makes them or their preferred leadership evil incarnate.

neilv 3y ago

The money vs. mission question was what I was trying to answer with this hypothetical polling: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38357485 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38357485 (It seems obvious that hitching your wagon to Mr. Altman probably has a much better chance of making you rich, than does playing harps on a cloud at an altruistic non-profit. The question is what you actually want.)