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

Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 304 posts

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#181

Post by Analemma_ »

caycep wrote: post #164
paxys wrote: post #123

This entire OpenAI hardware thing is a vanity project by Sam Altman wanting really bad to be Steve Jobs. Just look at this comical announcment photo and letter from last year https://openai.com/sam-and-jony/ . If this lawsuit results in the whole thing getting canned it might actually be good for OpenAI because it'll save them from pouring further billions down the drain over what will eventually be the Humane Pin 2.…

I wonder why so many ex apple followed this particular path of Kool Aid? or maybe this says more about how the rank and file are just as susceptible to kool aid as any average Silicon Valley schmuck

I don't think it's Kool-Aid, I think it's "Apple has notoriously low salaries for a FAANG and OpenAI will probably have a trillion-dollar IPO". You can see right through Altman's charade and still want to work for him for equity.

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#182

Post by bickfordb »

jdross wrote: post #69

Apple is cutthroat in business too. Tony Fadell, the inventor of the iPod and co-inventor of the iPhone, and later Nest founder, commented this in Stratechery about the lawsuit when filed: "This is Apple’s typical tactic to scare Apple employees — either former or current. I heard this lawsuit was driven by the Apple board. Steve threatened to file a lawsuit against Nest for poaching 80-100 Apple employees. He called…

I think it's notable that Apple is vague about what was actually stolen and what OpenAI has actually received.

I read into these PR blasts, lawsuits that Apple is sour about losing employees to higher salary opportunities, and is likely using lawsuits instead of higher salaries to retain them.

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#183

Post by pixelatedindex »

bilekas wrote: post #134
jdross wrote: post #69

Apple is cutthroat in business too. Tony Fadell, the inventor of the iPod and co-inventor of the iPhone, and later Nest founder, commented this in Stratechery about the lawsuit when filed: "This is Apple’s typical tactic to scare Apple employees — either former or current. I heard this lawsuit was driven by the Apple board. Steve threatened to file a lawsuit against Nest for poaching 80-100 Apple employees. He called…

Jobs had something to prove though. He was kicked out, brought back, he definitely wanted to ensure his legacy. But while I don't agree with it, I think it's harder to be an ethical company that makes it to a billion than a non ethical one. When shareholders are involved you don't have a choice really.. You're obliged to maximize their earnings.

> You're obliged to maximize their earnings.

Sometimes I think it’s time to give shareholder supremacy a rest. If they don’t like what they own, they can sell it. But this is probably also why I’m not on a board of directors.

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#184

Post by givinguflac »

paul7986 wrote: post #84
thewebguyd wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren't supposed to have a full conversation with Siri, it's an assistant not a chatbot. Tell it to do a task, and it does the task. In those leaked system prompts/instructions Apple pretty explicitly wants to avoid conversational engagement to stop the whole "AI friendship" crap from happening.

I can get a lot done in the car talking to chatGPT where i use voice conversation the most. I do not use it for an AI friend but as a voice assistant who can get things done for me quicker then picking up my phone in the car, when it's across the room, when i dont want to pick up my phone and etc, etc. Apple is working now on a slew of devices focused on voice as Open AI (Space X is purportedly working on an AI focus…

You’ve got to realize that you’re comparing a server farm running gpt to a model running for most things locally, on the oldest phone that supports it. It’s as close to apples to oranges as you can really get, yet I’d argue the Siri ai revamp is pretty impressive given these considerations.

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#185

Post by lwkl »

everforward wrote: post #61
nvme0n1p1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The outcome shouldn't depend whether they had "poor" security anyway. If I leave my front door locked, it might increase the chances I get robbed, but it doesn't make robbing me legal.

Sure, but this is about IP law instead of physical goods. This is like if you left your door wide open, and a neighbor peaked in and told another neighbor about your decor or what posters are on the walls. You didn’t lose anything tangible, but something you wanted to be secret isn’t anymore. Where the balance of blame falls is up to you, but I do think to some degree that if you want to keep a secret and can’t put i…

Having access doesn't mean you are allowed to access something. Let's say I started working at a new company and notice I can still access the source code at my old company. This doesn't mean I am allowed to download it and give it to my new employer even if we just use it as a reference.

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#186

Post by sandeepkd »

paxys wrote: post #93
jdross wrote: post #69

Apple is cutthroat in business too. Tony Fadell, the inventor of the iPod and co-inventor of the iPhone, and later Nest founder, commented this in Stratechery about the lawsuit when filed: "This is Apple’s typical tactic to scare Apple employees — either former or current. I heard this lawsuit was driven by the Apple board. Steve threatened to file a lawsuit against Nest for poaching 80-100 Apple employees. He called…

Apple was the ringleader in the illegal anti-poaching agreements between SV companies a couple decades ago.

> anti-poaching

The term make it sounds like a good thing, however I do not know if this was really a net positive. It might have helped the companies but isn't this anti-competitive at the employee level?

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#187

Post by leoh »

overgard wrote: post #170
charlesfries wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tangentially related, but I was rewatching the old iPhone 3G keynote recently, and you wouldn't believe who made an appearance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X5xOI_qu9I&t=1649s

Funnier when you consider what Loopt amounted to.

Altman is such a shyster

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#188

Post by leoh »

This is such a disaster of Apple’s own making.

Apple is retarded in that they encourage their employees to use their personal iCloud credentials while working there and make it very difficult for employees to request a serrate work phone. It is tremendously idiotic from a security standpoint and is not the way virtually any other big firm does things.

As a Google employee I can’t imagine them compelling me to use a personal Gmail account for anything.

Moreover, although we can use personal Android devices, most orgs make it easy for employees to get a separate work phone. To the degree they allow personal android devices, this is only because Google has done significant work to allow for an isolated “work” profile with an entirely different email address / login. Because iPhone lacks this feature, corporate access on those devices is heavily curtailed.

I somehow doubt the Apple board has been made aware of these shenanigans and abhorrent security posture.

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#189

Post by thewebguyd »

pixelatedindex wrote: post #183
bilekas wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jobs had something to prove though. He was kicked out, brought back, he definitely wanted to ensure his legacy. But while I don't agree with it, I think it's harder to be an ethical company that makes it to a billion than a non ethical one. When shareholders are involved you don't have a choice really.. You're obliged to maximize their earnings.

> You're obliged to maximize their earnings. Sometimes I think it’s time to give shareholder supremacy a rest. If they don’t like what they own, they can sell it. But this is probably also why I’m not on a board of directors.

Interestingly enough, Apple at one point had that attitude even under Cook.

> “When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don’t consider the bloody ROI,” Cook said. “If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock.”

That was back in 2014.

But I do agree, it's time to normalize telling shareholders where they can shove it. If they don't like it, they can sell.

Re: Apple says more ex-employees may have taken confidential data to OpenAI

#190

Post by thewebguyd »

bilekas wrote: post #134
jdross wrote: post #69

Apple is cutthroat in business too. Tony Fadell, the inventor of the iPod and co-inventor of the iPhone, and later Nest founder, commented this in Stratechery about the lawsuit when filed: "This is Apple’s typical tactic to scare Apple employees — either former or current. I heard this lawsuit was driven by the Apple board. Steve threatened to file a lawsuit against Nest for poaching 80-100 Apple employees. He called…

Jobs had something to prove though. He was kicked out, brought back, he definitely wanted to ensure his legacy. But while I don't agree with it, I think it's harder to be an ethical company that makes it to a billion than a non ethical one. When shareholders are involved you don't have a choice really.. You're obliged to maximize their earnings.

> You're obliged to maximize their earnings.

You're not though, legally anyway. Courts will generally not second-guess a board's business decisions so long as the board acted in "good faith" even if that decision results in loss for shareholders, or does something that does not maximize their returns.

Board just has to link the decision and the long term health of the company. But it's just that, health of the company which is legally distinct from the health or short-term desires of individual shareholders and investors.

Post reply on HN