261–270 of 787 posts
> The fact that we did not lose a single customer will drive us to work even harder for you, and we are all excited to get back to work. I'm not a big customer, but I am starting the process of moving away from OpenAI in response to these events
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? If the product is useful (it is to me), then why do you care so much as to the internal politics? If it ceases to be useful or something better comes along, sure. But this strikes me as being serially online and involved in drama
These internal drama can play out in the service. Frame the question as: do you want to build on an unstable/unsteady platform?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you don't rely on a business that had 80% of its staff threaten to quit overnight?
> staff threaten to quit overnight They didn't, though. They threatened to continue tomorrow! It's called "walking across the street" and there's an expression for it because it's a thing that happens if governance fails but Makers gonna Make. Microsoft was already running the environment, with rights to deliver it to customers, and added a paycheck for the people pouring themselves into it. The staff "threatened" to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A better lesson is that a board can't govern a company if the company won't follow its lead. They were misaligned with almost the entirety of the employees.
Because they formed an additional entity, which is a for-profit, and has leadership treating the whole thing as a for-profit, and so employees also see what their eyes are telling them. The misalignment is not accidental, it was carefully developed over the last few years.
> The fact that we did not lose a single customer will drive us to work even harder for you, and we are all excited to get back to work. I'm not a big customer, but I am starting the process of moving away from OpenAI in response to these events
That’s a strange statement because I definitely canceled my subscription as a result of the happenings. This very public battle confirmed for me how misaligned OpenAI is with the originating charter and mission of its nonprofit. And I didn’t want to financially contribute towards that future anymore. I guess my subscription didn’t count as a customer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And then we'd witness the market decide whether the company value was provided by its board or its employees
It's a non-profit. It should have no value aside from the mission. The only reason the employees mobilized in their whining and support of a person, whose only skills seems to be raising money and cult of personality, seems to be so that Altman can complete the Trojan horse of the non-profit by getting rid of it now that it has completed the side quest of attracting investors and customers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, their big mistake was being unwilling to be clear and explicit about this, but as I read it, the board's problem with him was that he wasn't actually acting as the executive of the non-profit that he was meant to be the executive of, but rather was acting entirely in the interests of a for-profit subsidiary of it (and in his own interests), which were in conflict with the non-profit's charter. I think where the…
Argue their case? To whom? They were the board.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He doesn't look like the guy into revenge. He seems extremely goal focused and motivated. The kind of person that'd put this behind him very fast to save energy for what matters.
> He doesn't look like the guy into revenge. How do you know this? Idk why this is the comment that broke the camel's back for me, but all over this site people have been making character determinations about people from a million miles away through the filter of their public personas.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The board should have called their bluff and let them walk.
I wonder if they ACTUALLY would have landed at Microsoft. And then, would they actually have their TC post tender met there? And would they continue working on AI for some time, independent of reorgs, etc? All of them? A place like MSFT has a TON of process and red tape, the board could have called their bluff and kept at least 40%.