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

OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#151

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

skygazer wrote: post #26

Man, the board already looked reckless and incompetent, but this solidifies the appearance. You can do crazy ill-advised things, but if you unwaveringly commit, we’ll always wonder if you’re secretly a genius. But when you immediately backtrack, we’ll know you were a fool all along.

Dude, everyone already thinks the board did a crazy ill-advised thing. They're about to be the board of like a 5 person or so company if they double down and commit.

To be honest I hate takes like yours, where people think that acknowledging a mistake (even a giant mistake) is a sign of weakness. A bigger sign of weakness in my opinion is people who commit to a shitty idea just because they said it first, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#152

Post by _boffin_ »

andy99 wrote: post #9

With the way they fired him and the statement they made, it's hard to see how any of the remaining four could stay on if he did come back... as was previously mentioned, if you shoot at the king, don't miss.

And oh boy, did they miss! There’s going to be a many of chapters written about this in textbooks.

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#153

Post by kmlevitt »

jstummbillig wrote: post #47
skygazer wrote: post #26

Man, the board already looked reckless and incompetent, but this solidifies the appearance. You can do crazy ill-advised things, but if you unwaveringly commit, we’ll always wonder if you’re secretly a genius. But when you immediately backtrack, we’ll know you were a fool all along.

That seems a lot be better than doubling down on a bad mistake to save face, but we do care quite a bit about about looking strong, don't we.

Obviously it’s better to own up to a mistake right away. But the point is if they are willing to backtrack this quickly, it removes all doubt that it WAS a mistake, rather than us just not understanding their grand vision yet.

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#154

Post by wnevets »

jstummbillig wrote: post #47
skygazer wrote: post #26

Man, the board already looked reckless and incompetent, but this solidifies the appearance. You can do crazy ill-advised things, but if you unwaveringly commit, we’ll always wonder if you’re secretly a genius. But when you immediately backtrack, we’ll know you were a fool all along.

That seems a lot be better than doubling down on a bad mistake to save face, but we do care quite a bit about about looking strong, don't we.

> That seems a lot be better than doubling down on a bad mistake to save face, but we do care quite a bit about about looking strong, don't we.

IMO Its not about looking strong, its about looking competent. Competent people don't fire their CEO of multi-billion dollar unicorn without thinking it through first. Walking back the firing so soon suggest no thinking was involved.

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#155

Post by fnordpiglet »

airstrike wrote: post #57

This makes sense. The board thinks they're calling the shots, but the reality is the people with the money are the ones calling the shots, always. Boards are just appointed by shareholders aka investors aka capital holders to do their bidding. The capped-profit / non-profit structure muddles that a little bit, but the reality is that entity can't survive without the funding that goes into the for-profit piece And if…

A non profit board absolutely calls the shots at a non profit, in so far as the CEO and their employment goes. Non profit boards are not beholden, structurally, to investors and there are no shareholders.

No stakeholder would walk away from OpenAI for want of sam Altman. They don’t license OpenAI technology or provide funding for his contribution. They do it to get access to GPT4. There is no comparable competitor available.

If anything they would be miffed about how it was handled, but to be frank, unless GPT4 is sam Altman furiously typing, I don’t know he’s that important. The instability caused by the suddenness, that’s different.

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#156

Post by Clubber »

corethree wrote: post #125
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #54

You know, I always found Mike judge to probably be the most prescient of all of the science fiction authors. In Office Space, Idiocracy, and most relevant here in Silicon Valley; he accurately, and very precisely not only forecasts, but deconstructs the reasoning, and vapid lack of core philosophy behind each of the real life narratives he’s parodying. That serious people still consider Silicon Valley as some kind of…

What you're not realizing is that it's like this everywhere. It's not exclusive to SV. Politics is part of human life. Adults are just kids with money.

SV can afford to pay a lot more journalists writing puff pieces about how great they are.

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#157

Post by hesdeadjim »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #79
ren_engineer wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

everything about it screams amateur hour, from the language and timing of the press release to the fact they didn't notify Microsoft. And how they apparently completely failed to see how employees and customers would react to the news, Ilya saying the circumstances for Altman's removal "weren't ideal" shows how naive they were. They had no PR strategy to control the narrative and let rumors run wild I doubt he return…

This story that they want him back turns it from amateur hour to peak clownshow. This is why you need someone with business experience running an organization. Ilya et al might be brilliant scientists, but these folks are not equipped to deal with the nuances of managing a ship as heavily scrutinised as OpenAI

Or little things like your $10b investment partner having a pissed off CEO and massive legal team ready to strike now. It’s such fucking amateur hour it’s incredible.

It’s unclear what Ilya thinks keeps the lights on when MSFT holds their money hostage now. Which is probably why there is desperation to get Altman back…

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#158

Post by Meekro »

gkoberger wrote: post #80
Jensson wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope Sam comes back Why? We would have more diversity in this space if he leaves, which would get us another AI startup with huge funding and know how from OpenAI, while OpenAI would become less Sam Altman like. I think him staying is bad for the field overall compared to OpenAI splitting in two.

Competition may be good for profit, but it's not good for safety. The balance between the two factions inside OpenAI is a feature, not a bug.

This idea that ChatGPT is going to suddenly turn evil and start killing people is based on a lot of imagination and no observable facts. No one has ever been able to demonstrate an "unsafe" AI of any kind.

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#159

Post by ta988 »

gkoberger wrote: post #80
Jensson wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope Sam comes back Why? We would have more diversity in this space if he leaves, which would get us another AI startup with huge funding and know how from OpenAI, while OpenAI would become less Sam Altman like. I think him staying is bad for the field overall compared to OpenAI splitting in two.

Competition may be good for profit, but it's not good for safety. The balance between the two factions inside OpenAI is a feature, not a bug.

The only safety they are worried about is their own safety from a legal and economical point of view. These threats about humanity-wide risks are just fairy tales that grown ups say to scare each other (roko basilisk, etc there is a lineage) or cover their real reasons (which I strongly believe is the case for OpenAI).

Re: OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO

#160

Post by dannyw »

kmlevitt wrote: post #89
mycologos wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think they could have won in the court of public opinion ... [but] they tried to skewer him, and it backfired completely Maybe we have different definitions of "the court of public opinion". Most people don't know who Sam Altman is, and most of the people who do know don't have strong opinions on his performance as OpenAI's CEO. Even on HN, the reaction to the board "skwer[ing] him" has been pretty mixed, and mos…

What matters is what investors think, and by majority they seem very unhappy with all of this. Speaking for myself, if they had framed this as a difference in vision, I would be willing to listen. But instead they implied that he had committed some kind of categorical wrongdoing. After it became clear that wasn’t the case, it just made them look incompetent.

There are no investors in the nonprofit that controls OpenAI, LLC.
Post reply on HN