6 ms·

> PG is not universally opposed to people running multiple organizations I don't see why that matters, YC is "his" organization, other organizations can do wha

by zild3d 2y ago

> PG is not universally opposed to people running multiple organizations I don't see why that matters, YC is "his" organization, other organizations can do what they want Take out all the names, and it's just a belief that YC should be run by someone that's all in / fully committed.

edgyquant 2y ago
Right but this is him being fired
- apgwoz 2y ago
  This is Sam being given an ultimatum and making a choice before being fired. Is it effectively the same thing? Yes. But technically, he left to pursue OpenAI. YC never said “You’rrrrrrrrrrrre Firedddd!!!” (In my best Spacely Sprockets voice); it just politely asked him to leave if he couldn’t give 100%.
  - l1nktlst 2y ago
    This semantics argument seems super productive
- tomhoward 2y ago
  Fired means or at least connotes a specific thing, I.e., is against the will of the departing employee. Leaving the organisation by mutual agreement after an adult conversation to focus on exciting new project is a very different thing to fired.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - gregates 2y ago
    The adult conversation in question being, in a nutshell: "We've decided it's time for you to move on. Would you like the public perception of this event to be that it was a mutual decision, or would you prefer to burn some bridges on your way out?" Sure, in some sense the departing individual chooses to go one way rather than the other.
    - throw0101d 2y ago
      'Mutual agreement' could be that the employer didn't want the employee, and the employee was tired of BS being unreasonably dumped on them: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal (Not saying that this is such a situation.)
    - lolinder 2y ago
      Except that isn't at all what Paul is claiming here—he says YC offered him the choice between running YC and running OpenAI but not both at once. Altman chose OpenAI. That might have been the obvious choice in the circumstances (it certainly appears so in retrospect), but that doesn't turn the conversation into the kind you're claiming.
    - tomhoward 2y ago
      Or the adult conversation was: you need to pick one thing to focus on, we’d prefer it was YC but obviously we can’t force you to choose YC. PG’s telling if it, and Occam’s Razer, support that version. Many people here want to imagine that it was vastly more dramatic than this, or need to reinterpret the word “fired” to support the narrative that Sam is bad. I understand it can be fun to think that way. For the record I’m no great fan of OpenAI and I think people who are convinced they are about to achieve AGI are, er, mistaken. I mostly just care about correct definitions of words and avoiding sensationalism.
      - gregates 2y ago
        My point is mainly that PG's telling isn't trustworthy, because that's what you agree to say when the person you're "firing" chooses to go quietly. Obviously I have no specific insight into the situation, but given what I have observed about how career changes happen for people who've reached a certain level of power, I have no faith that the people involved have any interest in accurately describing the situation to the public.
        tomhoward 2y ago
        All you have to do is look at the fact that PG has been consistently effusive about Sam in his public comments and essays since the mid 00s through till the present day, for it to be clear that Sam wasn’t simply fired. Of course these situations are always complex behind the scenes, with many factors and considerations at play. But the no he must really just have been fired against his will claim just doesn’t pass the sniff test to anyone paying attention.
- AlwaysRock 2y ago
  The entire point of the tweet is to explain that he wasnt fired.
  - fwip 2y ago
    Yeah, and the tweet isn't being honest. Issuing somebody an ultimatum that you know they'll refuse is just a different way to get rid of someone.
    - burnished 2y ago
      Which was also clearly not the case here.
      - fwip 2y ago
        Clearly?
    - AlwaysRock 2y ago
      If PG's goal was to show Sam was actually fired, why would he take it upon himself to make a tweet explaining that Sam wasnt fired?
- imgabe 2y ago
  Being fired does not include the option to stay.

by zild3d 2y ago

edgyquant 2y ago

Right but this is him being fired

apgwoz 2y ago
This is Sam being given an ultimatum and making a choice before being fired. Is it effectively the same thing? Yes. But technically, he left to pursue OpenAI. YC never said “You’rrrrrrrrrrrre Firedddd!!!” (In my best Spacely Sprockets voice); it just politely asked him to leave if he couldn’t give 100%.
- l1nktlst 2y ago
  This semantics argument seems super productive
tomhoward 2y ago
Fired means or at least connotes a specific thing, I.e., is against the will of the departing employee. Leaving the organisation by mutual agreement after an adult conversation to focus on exciting new project is a very different thing to fired.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- gregates 2y ago
  The adult conversation in question being, in a nutshell: "We've decided it's time for you to move on. Would you like the public perception of this event to be that it was a mutual decision, or would you prefer to burn some bridges on your way out?" Sure, in some sense the departing individual chooses to go one way rather than the other.
  - throw0101d 2y ago
    'Mutual agreement' could be that the employer didn't want the employee, and the employee was tired of BS being unreasonably dumped on them: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal (Not saying that this is such a situation.)
  - lolinder 2y ago
    Except that isn't at all what Paul is claiming here—he says YC offered him the choice between running YC and running OpenAI but not both at once. Altman chose OpenAI. That might have been the obvious choice in the circumstances (it certainly appears so in retrospect), but that doesn't turn the conversation into the kind you're claiming.
  - tomhoward 2y ago
    Or the adult conversation was: you need to pick one thing to focus on, we’d prefer it was YC but obviously we can’t force you to choose YC. PG’s telling if it, and Occam’s Razer, support that version. Many people here want to imagine that it was vastly more dramatic than this, or need to reinterpret the word “fired” to support the narrative that Sam is bad. I understand it can be fun to think that way. For the record I’m no great fan of OpenAI and I think people who are convinced they are about to achieve AGI are, er, mistaken. I mostly just care about correct definitions of words and avoiding sensationalism.
    - gregates 2y ago
      My point is mainly that PG's telling isn't trustworthy, because that's what you agree to say when the person you're "firing" chooses to go quietly. Obviously I have no specific insight into the situation, but given what I have observed about how career changes happen for people who've reached a certain level of power, I have no faith that the people involved have any interest in accurately describing the situation to the public.
      - tomhoward 2y ago
        All you have to do is look at the fact that PG has been consistently effusive about Sam in his public comments and essays since the mid 00s through till the present day, for it to be clear that Sam wasn’t simply fired. Of course these situations are always complex behind the scenes, with many factors and considerations at play. But the no he must really just have been fired against his will claim just doesn’t pass the sniff test to anyone paying attention.
AlwaysRock 2y ago
The entire point of the tweet is to explain that he wasnt fired.
- fwip 2y ago
  Yeah, and the tweet isn't being honest. Issuing somebody an ultimatum that you know they'll refuse is just a different way to get rid of someone.
  - burnished 2y ago
    Which was also clearly not the case here.
    - fwip 2y ago
      Clearly?
  - AlwaysRock 2y ago
    If PG's goal was to show Sam was actually fired, why would he take it upon himself to make a tweet explaining that Sam wasnt fired?
imgabe 2y ago
Being fired does not include the option to stay.