3 ms·
Isn't this the usual "we're not going to fire you because we want you to preserve your own dignity, so you should step down now or else we will fire you and it'
by noirscape 2y ago
Isn't this the usual "we're not going to fire you because we want you to preserve your own dignity, so you should step down now or else we will fire you and it's going to get ugly" spiel? Y'know, the same thing that happens whenever [big corporation] gets into a scandal and heads are required to roll in the C-suite; rarely do they actually get fired but "they step down" as if it was from the good of their own heart.
I dunno, PG claims that Altman wasn't fired but to me this reads like a difference that ultimately doesn't matter.
- tasuki 2y agoBut that is not the case. He was told that he had to choose between the two options, and he did. "You can no longer head YC and OpenAI at the same time, pick one", and he did. This does not sound like firing. It sounds like basic adulting on both sides.
- noirscape 2y agoI think the fact he had to be told this by the board is more telling here. It's pretty obvious that YC was told about Altman becoming CEO of the for-profit OpenAI at the same time everyone else was told about it. Effectively, they gave him an ultimatum: stay at YC and drop that CEO offer or leave. Sure, it's dressed up in nicer words to protect Altman's dignity (which is fine, in terms of "this is bad" it's pretty low, so preserving his dignity makes sense), but that's still what it is. The ultimatum is obviously not a realistic one - be beholden to the board or become your own chief while it's blatantly clear where his ambitions lie, so effectively it's a firing.