3 ms·

I must be missing some key detail here because this seems even more over blown than AI itself. They wanted to motivate people to not disclose trade secrets? Oh

I must be missing some key detail here because this seems even more over blown than AI itself. They wanted to motivate people to not disclose trade secrets? Oh no.

benzible 2y ago
The key details are how completely outside the norms of SV / tech this behavior is; how they, and Sam specifically, clearly lied about it - especially egregious when they want to be seen as the trustworthy steward of "AGI"; and as a business story, how this seems to be eroding trust of the company among their current employees and how damaging this will likely be in their efforts to recruit top AI talent. I don't think there will be quite so many heart emoji tweets for Sam in the future.
digitaltrees 2y ago
Clawing back vested equity it materially different that a general “incentive”. It’s way outside of standard practice and borderline abuse given the imbalance of negotiating power. Further, if OpenAI or Sam lied publicly by saying they weren’t aware it was going on and did this seems to be the very type of untrustworthy lack of candor that the board identified when they ousted him. I was a vocal defender of Sam in the immediate aftermath but these facts are definitely concerning. OpenAI is moving fast with a critical and dangerous technology. If their culture isn’t profoundly ethical they shouldn’t be trusted with the privilege and responsibility of what they are up to.
- luxuryballs 2y ago
  gotcha I get it more now if you thought you already had something in the bag threatening to pull it based on some new requirements is rather bogus
jhanschoo 2y ago
You are making factual errors in your response to the existence of this article. First, this was not primarily about NDAs and trade secrets, even though an NDA was mentioned. This was primarily about non-disparagement and the ability to criticize OpenAI, see the linked article https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2024/5/17/24158478/openai-departures-sam-altman-employees-chatgpt-release https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2024/5/17/24158478/openai... Second, this is not even about the existence of the non-disparagement agreement itself, it's about Altman claiming ignorance about its existence (see: the article again)
- luxuryballs 2y ago
  Yeah I have signed those before but also rejected them other times, I agree that it’s not exactly warm and fuzzy to have someone want you to sign on a line about your ability to speak freely!

I must be missing some key detail here because this seems even more over blown than AI itself. They wanted to motivate people to not disclose trade secrets? Oh no.

benzible 2y ago

The key details are how completely outside the norms of SV / tech this behavior is; how they, and Sam specifically, clearly lied about it - especially egregious when they want to be seen as the trustworthy steward of "AGI"; and as a business story, how this seems to be eroding trust of the company among their current employees and how damaging this will likely be in their efforts to recruit top AI talent. I don't think there will be quite so many heart emoji tweets for Sam in the future.

digitaltrees 2y ago

Clawing back vested equity it materially different that a general “incentive”. It’s way outside of standard practice and borderline abuse given the imbalance of negotiating power. Further, if OpenAI or Sam lied publicly by saying they weren’t aware it was going on and did this seems to be the very type of untrustworthy lack of candor that the board identified when they ousted him. I was a vocal defender of Sam in the immediate aftermath but these facts are definitely concerning. OpenAI is moving fast with a critical and dangerous technology. If their culture isn’t profoundly ethical they shouldn’t be trusted with the privilege and responsibility of what they are up to.

luxuryballs 2y ago
gotcha I get it more now if you thought you already had something in the bag threatening to pull it based on some new requirements is rather bogus

jhanschoo 2y ago

You are making factual errors in your response to the existence of this article. First, this was not primarily about NDAs and trade secrets, even though an NDA was mentioned. This was primarily about non-disparagement and the ability to criticize OpenAI, see the linked article https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2024/5/17/24158478/openai-departures-sam-altman-employees-chatgpt-release https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2024/5/17/24158478/openai... Second, this is not even about the existence of the non-disparagement agreement itself, it's about Altman claiming ignorance about its existence (see: the article again)

luxuryballs 2y ago
Yeah I have signed those before but also rejected them other times, I agree that it’s not exactly warm and fuzzy to have someone want you to sign on a line about your ability to speak freely!