161–170 of 272 posts
same story here - investors knew what they were buying into. A profit capped for profit, OWNED BY A NON PROFIT. Said non profit could, at any time, make decisions that are not optimal for profit. Surprise surprise.
Of course they'll push, but I doubt they'll get any sympathy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Sam comes back it’ll be under heavy changes. The board isn’t going to leave. You don’t get ousted and then get to call the shots, no matter how many employees you think you have on your side. Furthermore the fact that Sam is in talks is further proof that he won’t be coming back on his terms. As the board why would you fold to the employees just because they like a guy? I’m not copy pasting anything, cute diss tho…
Sorry to be blunt, but literally everything you said so far was nonsense, so I'll understand your opinion as a sign that Sam Altman will come back and the board will resign.
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?
They shouldn't be. But short of temporary insanity I'm running out of ideas on what it could be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wouldn't be so sure of that. Given that a bunch of the staff are acting like they're Heavens Gate members you also expect them to sabotage it? Or literally have a flavor-aid session in the office? > Their investors, employees and donors might disagree with that. Nobody wants to invest in a personality cult that's sworn an oath of fealty to one guy, dude. That's basically flushing money down the toilet, as this fi…
> Nobody wants to invest in a personality cult that's sworn an oath of fealty to one guy, dude. That's basically flushing money down the toilet, as this fiasco demonstrates. Are you aware that Microsoft and Salesforce CEOs have both offered to hire any OpenAI employees who want to switch boat, while Nvidia CEO and Meta's FAIR team have both made similar but slightly lesser "call me" offers to all of them? https://coi…
Sure, it's in their interest to break up a unified bloc of talent. Doesn't mean they genuinely want them.
> ???
The behaviour demonstrated by many of the staff on twitter is, for want of a better word, unhinged. Odd declarations of loyalty. 4am posts. Retweeting hearts. Acting very 'ride or die.' It's weird.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah okay Microsoft poaches them but they still have to restart building everything from scratch which wouldn’t benefit Microsoft. Microsoft doesn’t want to poach talent, they can always do that with or without this incident. Microsoft wants the whole bundle. Hence the media campaign Satya is doing.
No, the point is they would not have to start building everything from scratch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The board announced the removal of a CEO which they have the power to do. They have the power to remove him momentarily, do they have the power to keep him out? we're still finding out. > OpenAI’s valuation isn’t because Sam Altman is worth $90B it’s the tech. OpenAI's valuation is nominally because of the tech. It's fundamentally because of the people. 90% of the staff is threatening to follow Sam to $MS so that's…
If it’s fundamentally about the people, can you name some of these 90% that OpenAI couldn’t live without? Other than Ilya? From where I’m sitting the 90% are replaceable in a flooded market of available software engineers. If Satya and Sam make them happy then go work for Microsoft. The board is calling their bluff right now.
The market is flooded with junior engineers who have recently graduated from coding boot camps, and who might be good at building the specific types of software they have been shown. However, there is, as I understand it, still a dearth of senior engineers who can do the sort of work that OpenAI engineers are doing: building a novel product, with novel, cutting edge algorithms, at massive scale.
If lots of people could easily replicate OpenAI’s product, it seems strange that has nobody released a competitor to gpt4. Why is Microsoft - a company with one of the largest pools of software engineers in the world - clambering to hire all the engineers at OpenAI?
It’s because those people aren’t replaceable. There is probably a global pool of maybe ten thousand people who can do the work that OpenAI is doing. And OpenAI has assembled a high performance team of ~800 of them. Those people are currently worth their weight in gold.
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 the current AND future tech. If most of the people who made that tech jump ship, that does not bode well for the future development of the technology. Maybe if the tech were something more ordinary, sure, but I think we both agree that it's not. For an investor, the future prospects of the company are generally a lot more important than its present state.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> The board announced the removal of a CEO which they have the power to do. They have the power to remove him momentarily, do they have the power to keep him out? we're still finding out. > OpenAI’s valuation isn’t because Sam Altman is worth $90B it’s the tech. OpenAI's valuation is nominally because of the tech. It's fundamentally because of the people. 90% of the staff is threatening to follow Sam to $MS so that's…