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

OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 154 posts

Re: OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

#141

Post by Johnny555 »

15457345234 wrote: post #140
Johnny555 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is up to single person whether company is worth investment, Regardless of who they fired, if the board is known to make arbitrary and capricious decisions about top executives without so much as a heads up to large investors, it's not clear that any investor will see them as being worth investment.

> make arbitrary and capricious decisions You think they just acted on a whim? Why? Why is everybody assuming that the board just flipped out and did something insane? To me, the rational assumption is that the board - being composed of multiple people who seem fairly well-grounded, i.e. not terminally online twitter types - are acting rationally. That's supported by them acting professionally; releasing one single p…

>You think they just acted on a whim? Why?

Because they fired him on Friday due to unspecified "lack of trust" issues and now, 2 days later, the new interim CEO is reportedly in talks to hire him back?

Do you not see why this looks like they fired him on a whim?

Re: OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

#142

Post by 15457345234 »

Johnny555 wrote: post #141
15457345234 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> make arbitrary and capricious decisions You think they just acted on a whim? Why? Why is everybody assuming that the board just flipped out and did something insane? To me, the rational assumption is that the board - being composed of multiple people who seem fairly well-grounded, i.e. not terminally online twitter types - are acting rationally. That's supported by them acting professionally; releasing one single p…

>You think they just acted on a whim? Why? Because they fired him on Friday due to unspecified "lack of trust" issues and now, 2 days later, the new interim CEO is reportedly in talks to hire him back? Do you not see why this looks like they fired him on a whim?

> the new interim CEO is reportedly in talks to hire him back?

Literally nobody unbiased is reporting this. This reporting is _all_ coming from 'their side.' You are inside the smoke and mirrors if you can't see that.

Re: OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

#143

Post by wddkcs »

15457345234 wrote: post #139
projectileboy wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you - this is one of the few reasonable takes I've seen on this whole mess. There is literally nothing Altman could have done that would justify the board having handled the situation in this way, and it makes them look grossly incompetent. Even if Altman had been engaged in some kind of criminal act, this is not the way in which you proceed. And regardless of whatever corporate structures you have in place, it…

> Even if Altman had been engaged in some kind of criminal act, this is not the way in which you proceed. Sometimes this is the _only_ way in which you proceed. If you gain knowledge of something truly egregious and don't eject the culprit you become immediately liable for any future malfeasance. Sometimes 'wow, gtfo right now' is the only safe course of action.

Unless Sam was using the AI to commit satanic sacrifices, it's hard to see what warrants expulsion at all, let alone immediate termination.

If they did have such a compelling reason to stuff their own reputation, they did a horrible job communicating it.

Re: OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

#144

Post by 15457345234 »

wddkcs wrote: post #143
15457345234 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even if Altman had been engaged in some kind of criminal act, this is not the way in which you proceed. Sometimes this is the _only_ way in which you proceed. If you gain knowledge of something truly egregious and don't eject the culprit you become immediately liable for any future malfeasance. Sometimes 'wow, gtfo right now' is the only safe course of action.

Unless Sam was using the AI to commit satanic sacrifices, it's hard to see what warrants expulsion at all, let alone immediate termination. If they did have such a compelling reason to stuff their own reputation, they did a horrible job communicating it.

> they did a horrible job communicating it

I think their communication is perfectly professional. You're just expecting some weird tell-all because that's how this sector weirdly chooses to operate, just blurting shit out on twitter then thinking about the consequences later.

The wording of their press release is wonderfully professional. Discreet, generic, succinct. That's how things should be done.

It's the other side that are acting oddly. Charging into the office and taking selfies, counting public oaths of fealty on twitter? V. weird.

Re: OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

#146

Post by figassis »

bogwog wrote: post #32

I don't follow OpenAI or SV news all that much. Is this guy really that critical to the company? I thought Ilya Sutskever was the genius? Is this a non-compete thing, where they're scared Altman will take company secrets to a competitor, or is this dude actually a major factor in the company's success (and not just a lucky bystander)?

They likely knew if this was not a surprise, they would have been blocked from doing it by political maneuvering.

Re: OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

#147

Post by LelouBil »

15457345234 wrote: post #144
wddkcs wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless Sam was using the AI to commit satanic sacrifices, it's hard to see what warrants expulsion at all, let alone immediate termination. If they did have such a compelling reason to stuff their own reputation, they did a horrible job communicating it.

> they did a horrible job communicating it I think their communication is perfectly professional. You're just expecting some weird tell-all because that's how this sector weirdly chooses to operate, just blurting shit out on twitter then thinking about the consequences later. The wording of their press release is wonderfully professional. Discreet, generic, succinct. That's how things should be done. It's the other s…

It's true they were professional in their press releases, but they still didn't explicitly say the reason he was fired, and so people keep speculating.

Re: OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

#149

Post by trashtester »

jrflowers wrote: post #116
blackoil wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MS investments are in for-profit company, not the parent.

Exactly, that’s why the investors should get to fire the board of the charity

Which board? The board of the for-profit subsidiary or the non-profit parent?

Re: OpenAI investors try to get Sam Altman back as CEO after sudden firing

#150

Post by ben_w »

pjc50 wrote: post #75
notabee wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, now we know that once any putative superintelligence learns how to wave money around, we're doomed. All the preparatory "alignment" isn't going to save us from our own greed.

I mean, obviously? Any distant, hypothetical, unlikely AI apocalypse is going to need a lot of willing human accomplices.

An apocalypse needs power. That power can be offering money to humans, but doesn't have to be: other (thankfully not yet existent) possibilities include hacking a single clanking replicator, as would offering rewards to unrelated non-human uplift project subjects.
Post reply on HN