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

481–490 of 518 posts

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

#481

Post by aamoyg »

davorak wrote: post #311
andrewstuart wrote: post #61

If Ilya unknown-to-anyone thinks people prefer him to Altman, he has another thing coming. I'm not an Altman fanboy, but anyone can see Altman is a rockstar and richt or wrong, that matters HUGELY to OpenAI. If it's truly about a power play then this will be undone pretty quick, along with the jobs of the people who made it happen. Microsoft has put a vast fortune into this operation and if Satya doesn't like this th…

> If it's truly about a power play then this will be undone pretty quick, along with the jobs of the people who made it happen. The board that made this decision to fire Altman and they are the captain of the ship. > if Satya doesn't like this then it will be changed back real fast, Ilya fired and the entire board resign. That's my prediction. MS does not own openAI if the board does not want Satya to have a say Sata…

I am pretty sure that Satya Nadella would want Altman booted.

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

#482

Post by Jensson »

hackerlight wrote: post #443
kzrdude wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brockman immediately said "don't worry, great things are coming", which also seems to line up.

What doesn't line up is Brockman saying they're still trying to figure out why it happened.

He could get sued if he admitted that he was conspiring with Altman to use company resources for a competitor, so he would say regardless if he was guilty or not.

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

#483

Post by jstarfish »

janejeon wrote: post #438
racketcon2089 wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you look at the written word and find yourself consistently imputing clear intent which is hostile, aggressive, sarcastic, and demeaning which no one else but you sees, a thoughtful person would begin to introspect.

Again, I'm not sure why you and the other person are just out for blood and keep trying to make it personal, but you can clearly feed it into NLP/ChatGPT and co and even the machines will tell you the actual wordings are aggressive.

I'll bite. I even led the witness on this one by outright asking if it's aggressive.

> "a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities."

> The provided text is not explicitly aggressive; however, it conveys a critical tone regarding the individual's communication, emphasizing hindrance to the board's responsibilities.

Did you actually run this through GPT...or did you poll Reddit?

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

#484

Post by cscurmudgeon »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #403
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comparison again lol. > As if most humans would do any better on those exercises. Thats not the point. If you claim you have a machine that can fly, you can't get around a proof of that by saying "mOsT hUmAns cAnt fly" so therefore this machine not flying is irrelevant. This thing either objectively reasons or not. It is irrelevant how well humans do on those tests. > This thing is two years old. Be patient. Nob…

At various points from 1950, the gullible mass claimed AGI. Who's claiming it now? All I see is a paper slagging GPT4 for struggling in tests that no one ever claimed it could pass. In any case, if it were possible to bet $1000 that 90%+ of those tests will be passed within 10 years, I'd be up for that. (I guess I should read the paper more carefully first, though, to make sure he's not feeding it unsolved Hilbert pr…

The guy I replied to is claiming AGI:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38314733

"GPT 4 is clearly AGI. All of the GPTs have shown general intelligence, but GPT 4 is human-level intelligence. "

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

#486

Post by anonymouskimmer »

clnq wrote: post #442
ryandrake wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People get fired all the time: suddenly, too. If I got fired by my company tomorrow, they wouldn't treat me with kid gloves, they'd just end my livelihood like it was nothing. I'd probably find out when I couldn't log in. Why should "upper management" get a graceful farewell? We don't have royalty in the USA. One person is not inherently better than another.

> Why should "upper management" get a graceful farewell Injustices are made to executives all the time. But airing dirty laundry is not sagacious.

All I saw was one phrase indicating there was cause for termination, with no additional explanation. This doesn't seem like airing dirty laundry to me.

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

#487

Post by lfmunoz4 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #337

Some weeks ago, I listened to a Bloomberg interview with Altman where he was joined by someone from OpenAI who does the programming. There was obvious disagreement between the two, and the interviewer actually made a joke about it. Perhaps Altman was destined to become the next SBF. Too much misrepresentation to the public, telling people what they want to hear..

what is the disagreement

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

#488

Post by CamperBob2 »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #484
CamperBob2 wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At various points from 1950, the gullible mass claimed AGI. Who's claiming it now? All I see is a paper slagging GPT4 for struggling in tests that no one ever claimed it could pass. In any case, if it were possible to bet $1000 that 90%+ of those tests will be passed within 10 years, I'd be up for that. (I guess I should read the paper more carefully first, though, to make sure he's not feeding it unsolved Hilbert pr…

The guy I replied to is claiming AGI: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38314733 "GPT 4 is clearly AGI. All of the GPTs have shown general intelligence, but GPT 4 is human-level intelligence. "

Fair enough, that seems premature. Transformers are clearly already exceeding human intelligence in some specific ways, going back to AlphaGo. It's almost as clear that related techniques are capable of approaching AGI in the 'G' (general) sense. What's needed now is refinement rather than revolution.

Being able to emit code to solve problems it couldn't otherwise handle is a huge deal, maybe an adequate definition of intelligence in itself. Parrots don't write Python.

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

#489

Post by neuronerdgirl »

justinclift wrote: post #210
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.

Hmmm, that's the same reputation er... western science has as well.

It's really not.

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

#490

Post by naveen99 »

victor9000 wrote: post #260
tkgally wrote: post #75

I didn’t have much sense of who Ilya Sutskever is or what he thinks, so I searched for a recent interview. Here’s one from the No Priors podcast two weeks ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ft0gTO2K85A No clear clues about today’s drama, at least as far as I could tell, but still an interesting listen.

Judging from this interview, I wouldn't hold my breath hoping for more openness. Ilya seems to be against open sourcing models on the grounds that they may be too powerful. Good thing no one asked him to invent a wheel, after all people could travel too fast for their own safety.

Yeah, these well meaning safety / human alignment ideas sound more like centrally planned communism. In theory, good for everyone, in practice bad for everyone.

Interestingly socialist Europe(45% of gdp) and even capitalistic usa (25%) collect and redistribute more in tax revenue than Russia (10%) and China (12%). Numbers from memory maybe slightly off.

The flaw in communism was the central planning. The flaw in ai safety / alignment is also the central planning. Capitalism redistributed more wealth to the poor. Decentralized ai will distribute more benefits to humans than a centralized ai, even if it’s openly planned.

Post reply on HN