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

OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 596 posts

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#391

Post by ssnistfajen »

sensanaty wrote: post #336

Why are people suddenly jacking Altman off so hard? What has this non-technical dude done other than trying to corner the AI market for himself and implementing insane bullshit like worldcoin for him to deserve such weird devotion?

People love worshipping idols and saints, even when the demographic is largely irreligious.

Plus, the tech scene is extremely prone to hopping on trends and then taking it way too far. If you want some real cringe, check out @varun_mathur's long Twitter post from Nov 18th.

Although at its core, firing Altman under current circumstances was still a poorly thought-out decision which evidently caused the event itself to become a major centre of attention.

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#392

Post by furyofantares »

VectorLock wrote: post #342
vanshg wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He confirmed he's returning: https://twitter.com/sama/status/1726345564059832609

What's up with these guys not using capital letters?

IME that's been common or the norm in plenty of circles for more than 25 years (so probably longer). It became less common when people started phone-posting and when phones started auto-capitalizing by default.

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#393

Post by consumer451 »

sensanaty wrote: post #378
consumer451 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the most insanely overhyped piece of technology to have ever been created. Copying and pasting code from ChatGPT, I created a functional iOS app today based on my design. I have never before written a mobile app, any Swift code, or much of any code aside from Power Apps, in at least 15 years. I am on that hype train.

I didn't comment on whether the tech is good or bad, I just said it's overhyped (and you more or less proved my point). And again, what exactly has Sam himself done to bring about the tech? Without Ilya and the rest of the engineers and researchers you wouldn't have been able to copy/paste the code, why exactly is Sam the one that gets the credit here?

I was responding only to the part I quoted, which I read as criticism of the tech.

I am not necessarily an Altman hype man. As an obvious outsider, my best bet as to why he came back so strong was because apparently many researchers (employees) said they would leave as well. I can't read peoples' minds but I can infer a a bit based on human financial interest.

The employees with equity were very close to a liquidity event at a valuation of $86B. That is likely life changing money for many, and this whole Altman getting fired mess put that life changing money on hold.

I wonder if his ouster had been done in a more sane/stable way, if things could have kept chugging along without him.

As far as the average HN opinion, I donno, I have seen many upvoted comments saying... yeah, he's just the CEO.

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#394

Post by agnosticmantis »

Many are speculating that Sam Altman could just move on and create another OpenAI 2.0 because he could easily attract talent and investors.

What this misses is all the regulatory capture that he’s been campaigning for. All the platforms have now closed their gardens. Authors and artists are much more vigilant about copyright etc. So it’s now a totally different game compared to 3 years ago because the data is not just there up for grabs anymore.

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#395

Post by to11mtm »

zug_zug wrote: post #348
silenced_trope wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is why, when you claim to be running a non-profit to "benefit humankind," you shouldn't put all your resources into a for-profit subsidiary. To be frank, they need to really spell out what "benefitting mankind" is. How is it measured? Or is it measured? Or is it just "the board says this isn't doing that so it's not doing that"? It's honestly a silly slogan.

They should define it, sure. Here's what I'd expect this means: - Not limiting access to a universally profitable technology by making it only accessible to highest bidder (e.g. hire our virtual assistants for 30k a year). - Making models with a mind to all threats (existential, job replacement, scam uses) - Potentially open-sourcing models that are deemed safe So far I genuinely believe they are doing the first two…

That's kinda weasel-y in itself.

If a model is not safe, the access should be limited in general.

Or, from a business model perspective; a 'sane' nonprofit doing what OpenAI should, at least in my mind, be able to do the following harmoniously:

1. Release new models that do the same thing they make others allow access do to via their 'products' with reasonable instructions on how to run them on-prem (i.e. I'm not saying what they do has to be fully runnable on a single local box, but it should be reproducible as a nonprofit purportedly geared towards research.)

2. Provide on-line access to models with a cost model that lets others use while furthering the foundation.

3. Provides enough overall value in what they do that outside parties invest regardless of whether they are guaranteed a specific individual return.

4. Not allow potentially unsafe models to be available via less than both research branches.

Perhaps, however, I am too idealistic.

On the other hand, Point 4 is important, because we can never know under the current model, whether a previous unsafe model has been truly 'patched' for all variations of a model.

OTOH, if a given model would violate Point 4, I do not trust the current org to properly disclose the found gaps; better to quietly patch the UI and intermediate layers than ask whether a fix can be worked around with different wording.

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#396

Post by yeck »

aeonik wrote: post #356
yeck wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel that people have a right to life and liberty, but liberty does not mean access to god-like powers. There are many people that would do great things with god-like powers, but more than enough that would be terrible.

I don't think history, looking back at this moment, is going to characterize this as god-like powers. Monumental, like the invention of language or math, but not like a god.

To be fair it is a very subjective term, god-like. You could make a claim for many different technical advancements to represent god-like capabilities. I'd claim that many examples exist to day, but many of them are not readily available to most people for inherent or regulatory reasons.

Now, I feel even just "OK" agential AI would represent god-like abilities. Being able to spawn digital homunculi that do your bidding for relatively cheap and with limited knowledge and skill required on the part of the conjuror.

Again, this is very subjective. You might feel that god-like means an entity that can build Dyson Spheres and bend reality to it's will. That is certainly god-like, but just a much higher threshold than what I'd use.

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#397

Post by moscoe »

jejeyyy77 wrote: post #355
pdntspa wrote: post #246

I really hope Altman doesn't return to his role. It is nice to see some people showing some spine and standing up to business interestes. "Open"AI is and was a lie for the longest time.

This. For the universe to go back into balance, he needs to leave OpenAI and go start a for-profit competitor. That is the only way.

Too late. It has escaped.

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#399

Post by null0pointer »

shrimpx wrote: post #159
tempnow987 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the board has the support of all the staff the board will be absolutely fine. That said, not clear to me that board is supported by the staff. So if Sam goes, and many of the key staff go... will be interesting. And the boards style in all this, if that is the "mission" - is wild. You have partners, staff, businesses - doing a VC round and you blow it all up without it sounds like even talking to your board presid…

I think some of the staff definitely supports Altman, and are down to quit and follow him. Personally I hope that's what happens. Separate the altruistic-mission guys from the big-profit guys and let them go to town in their respective spheres.

The sad part is that nearly 100% of investment and resources will follow the big-profit group leaving the altruistic-mission guys in the dust with no resources and no money.

Re: OpenAI negotiations to reinstate Altman hit snag over board role

#400

Post by junofan »

dimask wrote: post #320
junofan wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see how that factors in. What matters is OpenAI’s enterprise customers reading about a boardroom coup in the WSJ. Completely avoidable destruction of value.

This is toatlly irrelevant to the board's initial decision though.

It is a complete departure from past stated means without clear justification.
Post reply on HN