Earlier quoted context omitted.
All of it is only as ironic as Alanis Morissette
[flagged]
[flagged]
Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
181–190 of 854 posts
Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#182Kind of ironic that people are jumping in here to defend Sam Altman on the message board of Y Combinator, which also fired him from an executive leadership role for similar reasons.
[flagged]
> does not address the substance of any claims for openAI specifically
Well, so what? Parent-poster is suggesting there's a pattern to Altman's conduct in a similar set of situations, and a precedent that we should bear in mind when looking at more-recent stuff. By it's very nature, that kind of argument has to focus on past events.
While you might reasonably disagree with their conclusion, it seems you're demanding nobody consider anything except one particular event in isolation from all past history, which is absurd.
> A comment that does not address the substance [...] but instead attacks it on a meta level.
Yet you literally just did that. You ignored the substance of their comment--relevant past events--to attack it as too "meta."
Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
Employees are not replacable like that. Almost the entire company was threatening to quit. If it was possible to simply replace all of openAI, then you could just do that now, as an outside party. So the boards choice was to either bring back Sam or watch the entire company go under.
The board should have been transparent about the dishonesty, especially around financial stakes, and I suspect the OpenAI employees and MSFT would have reacted differently.
The dishonesty regarding the ChatGPT release sounds like the best decision that Sam or anyone could have made in the history of the company.
The ChatGPT release is what made the AI movement go mainstream. It is why OpenAI is worth ~80 billion dollars.
By Gods am I glad that the board wasn't able to stop ChatGPT from being released.
Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
>But it's a matter of survival of the entire universe? Surely you jest.
What's the alternative? Mocha?
The "entire universe" or "future of humans" type arguments are essentially psychopathy. I am not calling you a psychopath either.
I do very strongly urge you to cast that kind of thinking aside.
Fact is, in many cases where those kinds of arguments are seen, we will also see someone who really, really does not want to be told what to do and or who cannot tolerate a decision they do not agree with.
One can justify any means to any end thinking like that, which is why I am tagging that kind of reasoning as psychopathy.
It is unhealthy.
Take care, live well, peace and all that. I mean nothing personal.
Just give this all some real thought. You are extremely likely to be better off for having done it.
Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#185Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#186I mean at this point what sama has exposed himself pretty much aligns with what his 'enemies' say about him. Good job at presenting himself otherwise up until 6 months ago I guess.
He has done an impressive job over the past few months in interviews where he says lots of word with zero substance.
And very confidently too. Similar to his product.
Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#187Paul Graham has said that one of the things he likes best about Sam Altman is that he figures out ways to "hack" things, and specified that he didn't mean programming, but rather systems, institutions, people, etc. As for me, I'd prefer to see Paul Graham running Open AI.
That is called as social engineering. Is that a good thing, to be able to manipulate people like that?
Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like he outsmarted them and they were holding back the organization.
This is the attitude of a rebellious child instead of a professional. Boards serve a vital fiduciary duty to ensure good corporate governance. They do not exist to hold back the organisation and are not there to be outsmarted.
I agree but this is an ideal notion. Boards are very often stacked or highly disfunctional either on purpose or by accident. Sometimes the board is just a front for a founder that wittingly or unwittingly serves to help dupe investors or other stakeholders.
The government doesn't hold boards to any standard. It's a free-for-all.
Sometimes they are owners, other times they are the ones being duped into rubber stamping and legitimizing criminals.
Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#189> She said, "We were very careful, very deliberate about who we told, which was essentially almost no one in advance, other than obviously our legal team and so that's kind of what took us to to November 17."
Did they not at least have a briefing packet or something prepared to give to major investors (ie, Microsoft) day-of if they were so worried about leaks that they couldn't get the major investors (ie, their own bosses) on board ahead of time?
Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the alternative? Mocha?
The "entire universe" or "future of humans" type arguments are essentially psychopathy. I am not calling you a psychopath either. I do very strongly urge you to cast that kind of thinking aside. Fact is, in many cases where those kinds of arguments are seen, we will also see someone who really, really does not want to be told what to do and or who cannot tolerate a decision they do not agree with. One can justify any…
Okay, but let's imagine, the board wants to detonate a nuclear bomb. You think it's not a great idea, because it might cause a lot of deaths. You are not seeing a way to convince them in other ways, however you do see a way where you can lie to them, to keep them from that idea and therefore saving many lives and possibly the World from assured mutual destruction. Would that be unethical? Would that be psychopathy?