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

OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 272 posts

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#131

Post by cellar_door »

righthand wrote: post #65
flappyeagle wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These words are gonna get ate one way or another. There is no outcome where the current board wins. Emmet is already threatening the board with resignation unless they provide evidence of wrongdoing [1]. Which they don't have, because they would have revealed it already. They are empty shirts. [1] https://x.com/emilychangtv/status/1727020834005700914?s=20

Why? The board announced the removal of a CEO which they have the power to do. It upset a bunch of employees who liked the CEO. The board is in search of a new CEO. OpenAI’s valuation isn’t because Sam Altman is worth $90B it’s the tech. The tech is fine. Investors have no reason to worry about their investment in the tech. The people under pressure are Sam Altman trying to reclaim his job he was fired from and Satya…

> Investors have no reason to worry about their investment in the tech

What? They have a MASSIVE reason to worry: 3/4 board members are clearly not aligned with the profit motive. And D'angelo has a massive conflict of interest with monetizing their models.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#132

Post by jacquesm »

papercrane wrote: post #67
jacquesm wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? An emission could be done and whoever has the right to buy could pick it up. End of story.

My understanding is the OpenAI holding company, which is controlled by the board of directors, owns 51% of the capped-profit company, with Microsoft owning the other 49%. There doesn't seem to be a scenario where Microsoft can buy a controlling interest without the boards approval.

Yes, hence the word 'settlement' in my original comment. As in: you ensure we get a controlling interest and we'll let you go quietly.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#133

Post by mminer237 »

hyperliner wrote: post #77
4death4 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a normal corporation, they would be empty shirts, because ultimately they serve at bequest of the share holders. But this is a non-profit so they actually have a lot of power and don't need to answer to anyone.

But don’t they have to answer to the people who funded the nonprofit? I am ignorant, but you seem to be knowledgeable about this topic.

They need to comply with any profit-sharing or loan repayments, but funders can't have any control. The only person who would have input into whether or not the board is properly fulfilling its non-profit mission would be the Delaware attorney general.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#134

Post by jacquesm »

righthand wrote: post #65
flappyeagle wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These words are gonna get ate one way or another. There is no outcome where the current board wins. Emmet is already threatening the board with resignation unless they provide evidence of wrongdoing [1]. Which they don't have, because they would have revealed it already. They are empty shirts. [1] https://x.com/emilychangtv/status/1727020834005700914?s=20

Why? The board announced the removal of a CEO which they have the power to do. It upset a bunch of employees who liked the CEO. The board is in search of a new CEO. OpenAI’s valuation isn’t because Sam Altman is worth $90B it’s the tech. The tech is fine. Investors have no reason to worry about their investment in the tech. The people under pressure are Sam Altman trying to reclaim his job he was fired from and Satya…

It's not about what the board can or can not do. It's about whether they can make it stick. I'm thinking they can't but plenty of clever people here on HN think they can. Time will tell.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#135

Post by golergka »

endisneigh wrote: post #36

The employees won’t resign and I doubt Microsoft will match the hypothetical 90B valuation for their profit participation units, otherwise they would’ve left already (Microsoft has agreed to match). The investors have no power here and are effectively irrelevant. The remaining board had little to lose. The charter explicitly calls investment risky, so they’re good there too. > The Company's duty to this mission and t…

> I doubt Microsoft will match the hypothetical 90B valuation for their profit share units, otherwise they would’ve left already (Microsoft has agreed to match)

If Microsoft won't, Google or Meta will.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#136

Post by quonn »

jacquesm wrote: post #13

Does anybody know who is currently CEO of OpenAI? Friday, Sam. Saturday, Mira. Sunday was a day off, Monday it was Emmet so who is it for today? Kidding aside, the board is under more and more pressure but - surprisingly - they haven't folded yet. I am interpreting that as that they are trying to get something out of it that nobody is willing to give them. The new CEO is also surprisingly not to be found at all, no p…

If the board resigns that may be good for the company, but it may not be good for those on the board. If, on the other hand, the board prevails OpenAI may still turn out to be fine regardless.

What do the board members have to loose by holding their ground?

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#137

Post by ben_w »

narrator wrote: post #68
flappyeagle wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These words are gonna get ate one way or another. There is no outcome where the current board wins. Emmet is already threatening the board with resignation unless they provide evidence of wrongdoing [1]. Which they don't have, because they would have revealed it already. They are empty shirts. [1] https://x.com/emilychangtv/status/1727020834005700914?s=20

So no evidence of wrongdoing then: -----> WHY DID THEY DO IT? SERIOUSLY! They all just decided to wake up that day and say let's go fire Sam and blow up the company because "lack of candor" that they can't even give details on?? These are serious people doing serious stuff. These are not idiots. What the heck is going on? Can anyone explain?

My guess, and it is just a guess, is that there's some deep and fundamental position that the board members hold to, which Sam cannot describe well enough to pass the Ideological Turing Test[0], and this failure was perceived as being deliberately dishonest.

Happens a lot. I know some on the very extreme outskirts of the left wing who look at the "splitters!" scene in Life of Brian and see themselves; I've seen it in arguments over programming language features; there's plenty of religious disputes that look like this from the outside; most of the Brexit arguments painted everyone who didn't agree with the speaker as being part of Team Other and merely an attempt to undermine Team Us; and so on.

People can get very seriously angry about things that seem totally pointless from the outside.

[0] https://www.lesswrong.com/tag/ideological-turing-tests

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#138

Post by jacquesm »

flappyeagle wrote: post #43
righthand wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think the board is under any pressure. If they don’t do anything else they just need the employees to fold on their threat to resign. Even if the employees resign, ChatGPT is still running and there are lots of people willing to take the defecting employees spots. The only thing they are pressured on is to fill in the story for the media point of view which is irrelevant to the actual functioning of OpenAI.

These words are gonna get ate one way or another. There is no outcome where the current board wins. Emmet is already threatening the board with resignation unless they provide evidence of wrongdoing [1]. Which they don't have, because they would have revealed it already. They are empty shirts. [1] https://x.com/emilychangtv/status/1727020834005700914?s=20

Well, at least he's still there. Wonder if they have a successor lined up already and whether or not that successor has already offered to resign.

It is all reminiscent of the Monty Python Judean people's front scene.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUHk2RSMCS8

Though, arguably they showed more discipline.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#139

Post by dymk »

empath-nirvana wrote: post #15
foobarian wrote: post #5

Assuming Altman has already signed paper with MSFT, how would this work exactly? Break whatever contract clause there was involved? Maybe it's customary to have an easy backout period in situations like this.

MSFT, presumably, is one of the investors that want him to stay at openai.

They offered him a job leading his own unit within MSFT, so that doesn't make sense

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#140

Post by endisneigh »

dgacmu wrote: post #92
endisneigh wrote: post #36

The employees won’t resign and I doubt Microsoft will match the hypothetical 90B valuation for their profit participation units, otherwise they would’ve left already (Microsoft has agreed to match). The investors have no power here and are effectively irrelevant. The remaining board had little to lose. The charter explicitly calls investment risky, so they’re good there too. > The Company's duty to this mission and t…

The investors have extremely deep pockets and good lawyers. I would not want to be on that board even with very good D&O insurance. It's not bulletproof, and a lawsuit by Altman, in particular, could be excluded from coverage and force them to defend themselves out of pocket.

Even if they wanted to sue, the employees would have to make some decision, forcing the issue regardless so I doubt it matters.
Post reply on HN