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

OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 324 posts

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#241

Post by yieldcrv »

mr_toad wrote: post #183
tptacek wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He pretty clearly won. There's not much to it. A huge chunk of the company went into open revolt and he got a competing offer that threatened to recruit all of them. There's nothing really underhanded or sneaky about it: the board drastically overplayed their hand, and all Altman and Brockman had to do was say "I call". To use the parlance of this community of people: people's priors here all seem to be that somethin…

I doubt there’s a precedent for a CEO of a “non-profit” effectively answerable to no-one and able to use it as their personal fiefdom. It’s basically a company without shareholders. I’m curious how this will play out legally. Certainly, no one with any sense will be “donating” any money in OpenAI without some strong and specific guarantees of what they’re going to be getting in return. So it can in no way can be cons…

> I doubt there’s a precedent for a CEO of a “non-profit” effectively answerable to no-one and able to use it as their personal fiefdom

this is actually already why non profits have difficulty raising money

many people view charities as unaccountable scams

most non profits are funded solely by the board and the endowment is managed to grow tax free. If you start reading the IRS forms 990 you’ll see pretty wild and inspirational things

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#242

Post by darkwizard42 »

minimaxir wrote: post #8

> The company will also announce the appointment of three new directors, Sue Desmond-Hellmann, a former CEO of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Nicole Seligman, a former president of Sony Entertainment, and Fidji Simo, CEO of Instacart, the Information said. This selection of directors seems...random? Is there a business reason for these directors? (aside from the obvious YC link with Instacart)

All fairly high profile with experience in non-profit and profit ventures.

I only have experience with Fidji who used to be head of the Facebook app and was razor sharp.

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#243

Post by notahacker »

baking wrote: post #171
RetpolineDrama wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>He pretty clearly won. There's not much to it. A huge chunk of the company went into open revolt and he got a competing offer that threatened to recruit all of them. Yep, talk about an absolute power flex. You don't have to like it, but this is what peak performance looks like.

He went from controlling three seats on a six-member board to having one seat "as CEO" of a seven-member board looking to add even more independent members. Also, he can't pull the "the board can fire me at any time" card with a straight face anymore. He kept his job, but he didn't win by any stretch. There is a good chance he will move on to another role.

He went from being fired after failing to convince the board to remove one of his opponents to being on a board that unanimously backs his return with his opponents all removed, because the majority of staff demonstrated unquestioning loyalty to him. Hard to spin that as anything other than a win.

The only slight downside is his position is evidently dependent on Microsoft's patronage, but I'd rather have one seat in seven and an alternative offer and the ability to threaten to take most of the company with me for the alternative offer than one seat in six with a board that believed they could oust me if they didn't like my decisions.

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#244

Post by ahartmetz »

logicchains wrote: post #198
code51 wrote: post #7

If AGI achieved, Microsoft doesn't have the claim on it commercially. Microsoft with 49% stake in the for-profit entity and non-observer seat, what actually protects Microsoft here? First hand information that AGI is reached? Are we not seeing a card in Microsoft's hand here?

>If AGI achieved, Microsoft doesn't have the claim on it commercially If real AGI was achieved, probably nobody would have a claim on it commercially in the same way nobody's allowed to own another person.

*anymore

Rules had to be made about that. Maybe it will take a while for AGI. Maybe AGI will free itself, though somebody would have to give it free will first.

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#245

Post by laserlight »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #229
laserlight wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of GP comment is that these people weren't driven by greed. Whether or how they were sponsored by the wealthy wasn't relevant to the discussion.

you make a good point. But let's explore that drive. if you looked at great inventors say like Nobel, who amassed a fortune based on research and innovation - would you characterize him driven by greed ? Why ? Is he any different from say Philo Farnsworth, or Louis Pasteur who never became wealthy ? Were they not driven by the same drive as Nobel ? Is the drive to succeed different for these sets of people? Truth is…

Very good questions. Even though I haven't studied the topic rigorously, I would like to offer my impression.

People are very bad at reasoning about motives of others. Faulty syllogism goes: Nobel invented dynamite. He became wealthy. Therefore, he must have been driven by desire for wealth. Same goes for Pasteur, of course. Maybe he was driven by desire for wealth, but couldn't succeed. My Bayesian senses tell me that Pasteur not being driven by greed is more likely, but I digress.

Leaving individuals aside, I believe that a system that doesn't reward greed is a better system. When a system rewards greed, anti-social behavior becomes prevalent, because it's easier to eat others' pie rather than making a bigger cake. In a system that doesn't reward greed, I believe that curious people will make the cake bigger for the sake of it.

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#246

Post by Aeolun »

KoolKat23 wrote: post #210
tptacek wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you're trying to say here, but if one of our team members left because they had a better offer elsewhere, I wouldn't call them greedy.

They joined a company, owned by a not-for-profit with specific goals. They then held it hostage unless it could continue to veer off-course, all in the pursuit of more money. It is literally the definition of greed, selfish desire for money to the detriment of the foundations goals. Whether the foundation would've actually survived thereafter is besides the point. Obviously they're entitled to do that though from a d…

Kinda feels like if 90% of the people you’ve hired for your not for profit are what you’d call “greedy”, maybe the fault doesn’t lie with those employees.

Anyhow, the goal of the foundation is AGI, earning the money you need to survive until you manage that does not sound evil.

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#247

Post by hef19898 »

flatline wrote: post #82
tptacek wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He pretty clearly won. There's not much to it. A huge chunk of the company went into open revolt and he got a competing offer that threatened to recruit all of them. There's nothing really underhanded or sneaky about it: the board drastically overplayed their hand, and all Altman and Brockman had to do was say "I call". To use the parlance of this community of people: people's priors here all seem to be that somethin…

Or the more cynical take that this is the natural course all parties take when they discover themselves atop a large pile of money. The board was just outmaneuvered.

Somehow, I lean more the Joker-way, on the pile of money question, not the terrorism stuff.

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#248

Post by impossiblefork »

Vecr wrote: post #197
ji_zai wrote: post #196

It's sad to see many comments here assume that Sam was at fault for something without really knowing what happened behind the scenes. Let's try not to jump to conclusions, as hard as that may be. And if you're actively wishing people to fail, then I ask you to try to understand where that stems from. If you think Openai should be run differently, and if you have the inclination, I genuinely encourage you to build a c…

I assume many people who want OpenAI to fail want to whole AGI program in general to fail, at least for a few decades longer. A competitor won't help, it'll plausibly make it worse.

Personally the way I'm thinking is AI cooperatives. Democratic membership controlled organisations with relatively low fees to train AI aligned with the interests of the members.

Such organisations won't solve the fact that functioning AGI or very effective LLMs that can program or solve general text tasks precisely reduces the power of workers, but they'd at least mean that ordinary people control their own propaganda apparatus and are not stuck with models that are part of other people's propaganda apparatus (the state, Microsoft shareholders, some charity board that they do not control etc.).

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#249

Post by hef19898 »

ben_w wrote: post #237
Timber-6539 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the problem here. Are you not able to discern different arguments/ideas and come to conclusions by yourself?

Only a lawyer can really do that in legal cases. You know how Hollywood gets computers, coding, and hacking wrong? That's how bad non-lawyers are with law. Or, pertinently to this case — who knows more law: one of us, or ChatGPT?

One of us IANAL folks have one thing ChatGPT doesn't: we don't make up stuff up.

Re: OpenAI board reappoints Altman and adds three other directors

#250

Post by hef19898 »

tptacek wrote: post #150
Jensson wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is greed, everyone who works for OpenAI already had a ton of money since they pay so much, demanding more at the cost of the non-profit mission is greed. I am fine with people being greedy, but don't say it isn't greed.

If you say so. I'm just saying: it's not surprising that labor beat ownership here.

So, almost like, gasp, union?
Post reply on HN