541–550 of 985 posts
As of 10am PT, 700 of 770 employees have signed the call for board resignation. [1] [1] https://twitter.com/joannejang/status/1726667504133808242
Incredible. Is this unprecedented or have been other cases in history where the vast majority of employees standup against the board in favor of their CEO?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If it turns out those were not ultimately motivated by actual concern for the good of the company then they have a lot of problems. The boards duty is to to the charitable mission, not any other concept of the “good of the company”, and other than the government if they are doing something like pursuing their own private profit interest or acting as an agent for someone elses or some other specific public wrongs, t…
I don't think you can wave away your duty of care to close to a thousand people based on the 'charitable mission' and I suspect that destruction of the company (even if the board claims that is in line with the company mission) passes that bar. I could be wrong but it makes very little sense. Such decisions should at a minimum be accompanied by lengthy deliberations and some very solid case building. The non-profit n…
What specific duty of care do you think exists, and to which thousand people, and on what basis do you believe this duty exists?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For starters about 700 employees seem to think their livelihood matters and that the board didn't exercise their duty of care towards them.
Neither for-profit corporations nor charities have a general legal duty of care for the livelihood of their employees.
As I posted elsewhere, I think this is a conflict between Dustin Moskovitz and Sam Altman. Ilya may have been brought into this without his knowledge (which might explain why he retracted his position). Dustin Moskovitz was an early employee at FB, and the founder of Asana. He also created (along with plenty of MSFT bigwigs) a non-profit called Open Philanthropy, which was a early proponent of a form of Effective Alt…
A thing a sad, understated ongoing is that so many people are throwing vitriol at Ilya right now. If the speculation here is true, then he just chased by a mob over pure nonsense (well, at least purer than the nonsense premise beforehand). Gotta love seeing effective altruists take another one on the chin this year though.
Im beginning to lean toward the time traveler sent back to prevent AGI by destroying OpenAI theory. Heh it reminds me of then end of terminator 2. imagine the tech community waking up and trying to make sense of Cyberdyne corp HQ exploding and the ensuing shootouts, “Like wtf just happened?!”.
But really they came back to destroy it not because it turned rogue, but because it hallucinated some code a junior engineer immediately merged in and then after the third time this happened a senior engineer decided it was easier to invent time travel and stop ChatGPT ProCode 5 from happening before spending yet another week troubleshooting hallucinated code.
As of 10am PT, 700 of 770 employees have signed the call for board resignation. [1] [1] https://twitter.com/joannejang/status/1726667504133808242
Given 90%, including leadership, seems a bad career move for remaining people not to sign, even if you agreed with the board's action.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Incredible. Is this unprecedented or have been other cases in history where the vast majority of employees standup against the board in favor of their CEO?
Jobs was fired from Apple, and a number of employees followed him to Next. Different, but that's the closest parallel.
I'm not going to say Sam Altman is a Gordon Ramsay. What I will say is that they both seem to have come from broken, damaged childhoods that made them what they are, and that it doesn't automatically make you a good person just because you can be such an intense person that you inspire loyalty to your cause.
If anything, all this suggests there are depths to Sam Altman we might not know much about. Normal people don't become these kinds of entrepreneurs. I'm sure there's a very interesting story behind all this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
chatgpt was under provisioned relative to demand, but demand was unprecedented, so it's not really fair to criticize much on that. (It would have been a much bigger blunder to, say, build out 10x the capacity before launch, without knowing there was a level of demand is known to support it.) Also, chatgpt's capabilities are what drove the huge demand, so I'm not sure how you can argue it is "shoddy".
Shipping broken product is a typical strategy to gain first mover advantage and try to build a moat. Even if it's mostly broken, if it's high value, people will do sign up and try to use it. Alternatively, you can restrict signups and do gradual rollout, smoothing out kinks in the product and increasing provisioning as you go. In 2016/17 Coinbase was totally broken. Constantly going offline, fucking up orders, taking…
This hardly seems equivalent to what you describe from Coinbase, where no doubt people were losing money due to the bad state of the app.
For most startups, one of the most pressing priorities at any time is trying to not go out of business. There is always going to be a difficult balance between waiting for your product to mature and trying to generate revenue and show progress to investors.
Unless I’m totally mistaken, I don’t think that OpenAI’s funding was unlimited or granted without pressure to deliver tangible progress. Though I’d be interested to hear if you know differently. From my perspective, OpenAI acts like a startup because it is one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For starters about 700 employees seem to think their livelihood matters and that the board didn't exercise their duty of care towards them.
> about 700 employees seem to think their livelihood matters and that the board didn't exercise their duty of care towards them It is difficult to see how such a duty would arise. OpenAI is a non-profit. The company's duty was to the non-profit. The non-profit doesn't have one to the company's employees; its job was literally to check them.