Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 518 posts

Re: Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?

#421

Post by vineyardmike »

junofan wrote: post #358
vineyardmike wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically half the point of this is that Microsoft isn’t a stakeholder. The board clearly doesn’t care or is actively hostile to the idea of growing “the business”. If they didn’t know then that they weren’t a stakeholder, they know now. MS owns a non controlling share of a business controlled by a nonprofit. MS should have prepared for the possibility that their interests aren’t adequately represented. I’m guessing…

Microsoft is a stakeholder. It’s absurd to suggest otherwise. The entire stakeholder concept was invented to encompass a broader view on corporate governance than just the people in the boardroom.

This is a non profit dedicated to researching AI with the goal of making a safe AGI. That’s what the mission is. Sama starts trying to make it a business, restructures it to allow investors, of which MSFT is a 49% owner. He gets ousted and they tell Microsoft afterwards.

It’s questionable how much power Microsoft has as a shareholder. Obviously they have a staked interest in OpenAI. What is up in question is how much interest the new leaders have in Microsoft.

If I had a business relationship with OpenAI that didn’t align with their mission I would be very worried.

Re: Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?

#423

Post by GenericPoster »

wyy1995 wrote: post #195

Years from now, people will realize that today was the starting point of OpenAI's decline. It's unfortunate that such important technological advancements were influenced by “palace politics”. Regardless, Sam's significant contributions deserved a more dignified departure, and the OpenAI board chose the least dignified way. Perhaps one day Sam will leave OpenAI, but it absolutely should not have been today.

Do you know something we don't? If so, don't be shy and share it with the class.

More seriously, only time will tell if today's event will have any significance. Even if OpenAI somehow goes bankrupt, given enough time, I doubt the history books will talk about its decline. Instead they would talk about its beginning, on how they were the first to introduce LLMs to the world, the catalyst of a new era.

Re: Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?

#425

Post by justanotherjoe »

hilux wrote: post #117
Bjorkbat wrote: post #100

I have a hard time believing this simply since it seems so ill-conceived. Sure, maybe Sam Altman was being irresponsible and taking risks, but they had an insanely good thing going for them. I'm not saying Sam Altman was responsible for the good times they were having, but you're probably going to bring them to an end by abruptly firing one of the most prominent members of the group, seeing where individual loyalties…

Reading between lots of lines, one possibility is that Sam was directing this "insanely good thing" toward making lots of money, whereas the non-profit board prioritized other goals higher.

You can definitely make the two goals work together. The only way to make money for openai is to bring more powerful ai to everyone. Focus on making less money would mean?? You dont do that?

Re: Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?

#426

Post by fsloth »

mlajtos wrote: post #418
fsloth wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The downfall of Nokia phones was seeded in it’s management culture. After one message from their CEO Elop Osbourned the market for Nokia phones faster than you can say ”burning raft”, the house of cards built on top of strong early brand history and increasingly commodotized radio technology, Micrsoft basically paid billions for an offering that would have required a heroic&legendary pivot (would have been possible w…

N9 was a work of art. Fuck Elop.

In general software seems to be really hard for hardware companies. This was the main reason for the downfall IMO. The things that make you succeed in hardware do not suffice, and are partly wrong in software.

The N9 etc demonstrated there was enough talent for a plausible pivot. Was it business wise obvious this would have been the only and right choice?

Re: Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?

#427

Post by mi_lk »

HlessClaudesman wrote: post #366

Here's my preferred theory, it's a tale as old as time. Sam Altman, like Icarus, flew too close to Microsoft's giant pot of money. He pivoted the company away from it's founding mission, unleashing the very djinn they originally set out to harness. Turns out there were people at OpenAI who really believed in the original vision.

This. VCs/tech bros are framing this as a coup except when you approach from this angle it all makes sense

Re: Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?

#428

Post by machomaster »

lucubratory wrote: post #352
hilux wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Research from PRC (across all of science, not specific to AI) has a terrible reputation. They are rewarded for sheer quantity. You can easily find many articles discussing this phenomenon. So the volume of Chinese AI papers says little to nothing about their advancements in the field.

That's a problem in all of science, and Chinese research is quite good in measures like citations as well, not just quantity of papers.

Chinese papers are (with much higher probability) citing Chinese sources. It's a self-empowering cycle, which doesn't say anything about the quality.

Re: Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?

#429

Post by js8 »

timeon wrote: post #419
js8 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a distraction only if you are not an effective altruist. To build AGI (so that all humans can benefit) you need money, so this was a way to make money so they could FINALLY be spent on the goal of AGI. /s I think the next AGI startup should perhaps try the communist revolution route, since the capitalist-based one didn't pan out. After all, Lenin was a pioneer in effective altruism. /s

Can '/s' after straw man sneak the message across?

I am strawmanning effective altruism in the same way that effective altruism strawmans just plain old altruism.
Post reply on HN