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

OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 946 posts

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#161

Post by freedomben »

code_runner wrote: post #101
cowthulhu wrote: post #48

It’s amazing how every action the board takes (or the new CEO chosen by the board) just makes them look worse. I’d like to offer my consulting services: my new consulting company will come in, and then whatever you want to do we will tell you not to. We provide immense value by stopping companies like OpenAI from shooting off their foot. And then their other foot. And then one of their hands.

Honestly, any strategy from George Costanza would be better than this. To start, he would’ve coasted at the easiest job on the planet.

"Was that wrong? Should I not have done that?"

Classic :-D

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#162

Post by [deleted] »

az226 wrote: post #142
fullshark wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems most likely Sustkever wanted him fired and then realized his mistake. Ultimately the board was probably quietly seething about the direction the company was headed, got mad enough to retake the reigns with that stunt and then realized what that actually meant. Now they are trying to unring the bell but cannot.

Trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#163

Post by ytoawwhra92 »

himaraya wrote: post #143
ytoawwhra92 wrote: post #99

Baseless prediction: MSFT buys ownership of OpenAI's for/capped-profit entities, implements a more typical corporate governance structure, re-instates Altman and Brockman. OpenAI non-profit continues to exist with a few staff and no IP but billions in cash. This whole situation is being used to drive the price down to reduce the amount the OpenAI non-profit is left with. SV don't try the "capped-profit owned by a non…

Why would the board endorse the sale?

Taking the current state of things at face value, Altman and Brockman are going to MSFT already and >90% of OpenAI staff are set to resign. If that happens they'll be forced to wind down operations. That will disintegrate their partnerships, which are their source of funding. They'll be left with IP but no staff and no resources to make any use of it.

They might decide that if that's going to happen anyway they should sell now so that at least they're left with some cash to pursue their charter.

Or perhaps they feel that selling the IP runs counter to their charter, in which case the whole thing goes down.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#164

Post by throwawayapples »

valine wrote: post #68
kumarvvr wrote: post #65

Giving 2 people the same project? Isnt this like the thing to do to get differing approaches and then release the amalgamation of the two? I thought these sorts of things are common. Giving different opinions on same person is a reason to fire a CEO? This board has no reason to fire, or does not want to give the actual reason to fire Sam. They messed up.

Steve Jobs famously had two iPhone teams working on concepts in parallel. It was click wheel vs multi-touch. Shockingly the click wheel iPhone lost.

and the Apple (II etc) vs Mac teams warring with each other.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#165

Post by threeseed »

ytoawwhra92 wrote: post #127
stingraycharles wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would MSFT buy the for-profit entity when they already have the employees and IP?

The employees haven't left yet. Business continuity is easier to achieve if the employment arrangements don't have to change. MSFT don't have OpenAI's IP. They have an exclusive right to some of it, but there's presumably a bunch that's not accessible to them. Again, business continuity is easier if they can just grab all of that and keep everything running as normal.

> MSFT don't have OpenAI's IP

Satya Nadella just did a podcast with Kara Swisher.

In it he specifically said, "we have all of the IP rights to continue the innovation".

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4i4lKsKevNSGEUnuu7Jzn6

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#167

Post by throwawayapples »

riku_iki wrote: post #66
impulser_ wrote: post #31

There is no way this is true. If it is the board might be the dumbest people alive. You fire the CEO and completely destroy a 90b company because of these two reasons? No wonder everyone wants out. I would think I was going crazy if I sat in a meeting and heard these two reason.

> If it is the board might be the dumbest people alive. it totally sounds like they outsourced company management to ChatGPT..

no way even ChatGPT is this nuts.

Ok, well, maybe it is. but a magic 8-ball would have been better than this.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#168

Post by discordance »

kumarvvr wrote: post #65

Giving 2 people the same project? Isnt this like the thing to do to get differing approaches and then release the amalgamation of the two? I thought these sorts of things are common. Giving different opinions on same person is a reason to fire a CEO? This board has no reason to fire, or does not want to give the actual reason to fire Sam. They messed up.

Happens all the time.

Teams of people at Google work on the same features, only to find out near launch that they lost to another team who had been working on the same thing without their knowledge.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#169

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

khazhoux wrote: post #106

An "Independent" board is supposed to be a good thing, right? Doesn't this clown show show that if a board has no skin in the game --apart from reputation-- they have no incentive to keep the company alive?

I think this was a unique situation due to timing. OpenAI had 9 board members at the beginning of the year, but 3 (Reid Hoffman, Shivon Zilis, and Will Hurd) had to leave for various reasons (e.g. conflict of interest, which IMO should have also taken D'Angelo off the board), and this would have never happened if they were still on the board. So you were left with a rare situation where the board was incredibly immature/inexperienced for the importance of OpenAI.

It has been reported that Altman was working on increasing the size of the board again, so it's reasonable to think that some of the board members saw this as their "now or never" moment, for whatever reason.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#170

Post by adolph »

az226 wrote: post #142
fullshark wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems most likely Sustkever wanted him fired and then realized his mistake. Ultimately the board was probably quietly seething about the direction the company was headed, got mad enough to retake the reigns with that stunt and then realized what that actually meant. Now they are trying to unring the bell but cannot.

Trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

it’s tough to hoe a row on the hill which they chose to cast their die
Post reply on HN