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

Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 985 posts

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#631

Post by jacquesm »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #624
jacquesm wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may very well have been the case but then they have a new problem: this smacks of carelessness.

Carelessness for who? Alman for not refilling the board when he had the chance? Others for the way they ousted him? I wonder if there were challenges and disagreements about filling the board seats. Is it normal for seats to remain empty for almost a year for a company of this side? Maybe there was an inability to compromise that spiraled as the board shrank, until it was small enough to enable an action like this. J…

Carelessness from the perspective of those downstream of the board's decisions. Boards are supposed to be careful, not careless.

Good primer here:

https://www.onboardmeetings.com/blog/what-are-nonprofit-boar...

At least that will create some common reference.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#632

Post by s1artibartfast »

danenania wrote: post #616
s1artibartfast wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isnt relevant to the question. Sam was on the board prior to all of these other directors, and responsible for selecting them. The post asks how/why Sam ended up with a board full of directors so far out of alignment with his vision. I think a big part of that is that the board was down several members, from 9 to 6. Perhaps the problem started with not replacing departing board members and this spiraled out of c…

Could be that the fault lines were already present and they couldn't agree on new members.

Indeed. perhaps it is an example how a small change like the departure of the first member can cause things to spiral out of control.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#634

Post by dragonwriter »

ealexhudson wrote: post #607
s1artibartfast wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isnt relevant to the question. Sam was on the board prior to all of these other directors, and responsible for selecting them. The post asks how/why Sam ended up with a board full of directors so far out of alignment with his vision. I think a big part of that is that the board was down several members, from 9 to 6. Perhaps the problem started with not replacing departing board members and this spiraled out of c…

Actually, you're rephrasing the question - it was specifically about "control", not "alignment". Even if we substitute "alignment" the problem is that the suggestion is still that Sam would have been "better protected" in some way. A 501(c)3 is just not supposed to function like that, and good corporate governance absolutely demands that the board be independent of the CEO and be aligned to the company goals not the…

> good corporate governance absolutely demands that the board be independent of the CEO

CEOs and subordinate executives being on boards are not unusual, and no board (especially a small board) that the CEO (and/or subordinate executives) sits on is independent of the CEO.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#635

Post by stevenwliao »

jacquesm wrote: post #276
danenania wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we assume bad faith on D'Angelo's part (which we don't know for sure), it would obviously be unethical, but is it illegal? It seems like it would be impossible to prove what his motivations were even if it looks obvious to everyone in the peanut gallery. Seems like there's very little recourse against a corrupt board in a situation like this as long as a majority of them are sticking together.

It's not illegal but it is actionable. You don't go to jail for that but you can be sued into the poorhouse.

Unless D'angelo has some expensive eight figure lifestyle, he's not going to a poorhouse anytime soon.

> He was chief technology officer of Facebook, and also served as its vice president of engineering, until 2008.

> D'Angelo was an advisor to and investor in Instagram before its acquisition by Facebook in 2012.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#636

Post by jacquesm »

stevenwliao wrote: post #635
jacquesm wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not illegal but it is actionable. You don't go to jail for that but you can be sued into the poorhouse.

Unless D'angelo has some expensive eight figure lifestyle, he's not going to a poorhouse anytime soon. > He was chief technology officer of Facebook, and also served as its vice president of engineering, until 2008. > D'Angelo was an advisor to and investor in Instagram before its acquisition by Facebook in 2012.

That depends on the amount of damage you cause.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#637

Post by fuzztester »

tspike wrote: post #544
SpaceManNabs wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Does this whole thing remind anyone else of the tech community’s version of celebrity gossip?

No. It reminds me more of Muddle [1] Ages' intrigue, scheming, and backstabbing, like the Medicis, Cesare Borgia and clan, Machiavelli (and his book The Prince, see Cesare again), etc., to take just one example. (Italy not being singled out here.) And also reminds me of all the effing feuding clans, dynasties, kingdoms, and empires down the centuries or millenia, since we came down from the trees. I guess galaxies have to be next, and that too is coming up, yo Elon, Mars, etc., what you couldn't fix on earth ain't gonna be fixable on Mars or even Pluto, Dummkopf, but give it your best shot anyway.

[1] Not a typo :)

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#638

Post by gumballindie »

Solvency wrote: post #596
gumballindie wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cant openai just use chatgpt instead of workers? I am hearing ai is intelligent and can take over the world, replace workers, cure disease. Why doesn't the board buy a subscription and make it work for them?

Because AI isn't here to take away wealth and control from the elite. It's to take it away from general population.

Correct, which is why microsoft must have openai's models at all cost - even if that means working with people such as altman. Notice that microsoft is not working with the people that actually made chatgpt they are working with those on their payroll.

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#639

Post by robg »

splatzone wrote: post #516
tedmiston wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard others take this stance, but a common response so far has been "Poe is so small as to be irrelevant", "I forgot it exists", etc in the grand scheme of things here.

When it's your company, it's never small.

And it quickly feels personal…

Re: Sam Altman is still trying to return as OpenAI CEO

#640

Post by s1artibartfast »

jacquesm wrote: post #631
s1artibartfast wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carelessness for who? Alman for not refilling the board when he had the chance? Others for the way they ousted him? I wonder if there were challenges and disagreements about filling the board seats. Is it normal for seats to remain empty for almost a year for a company of this side? Maybe there was an inability to compromise that spiraled as the board shrank, until it was small enough to enable an action like this. J…

Carelessness from the perspective of those downstream of the board's decisions. Boards are supposed to be careful, not careless. Good primer here: https://www.onboardmeetings.com/blog/what-are-nonprofit-boar... At least that will create some common reference.

Using that framework, I still think it is possible that this is the result of legitimate and irreconcilable differences in opinion about the organization’s mission and vision and execution.

Edit: it is also common for changing circumstance to bring pre-existing but tolerable differences to the relevant Forefront

Post reply on HN