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

OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 272 posts

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#251

Post by righthand »

flappyeagle wrote: post #240
righthand wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not flooded with junior engineers, it's engineers of all skill levels. I happen to know as someone who is senior looking for work right now. Most of the open positions are for senior and staff level positions. Microsoft isn't clambering to hire them, they're clambering for the IP. The OpenAI employees will get significantly less if they go over to Microsoft.

My guy. It’s flooded with juniors. Juniors at all levels of junior-ness. Including ones called “senior”

I hope you enjoy the difficulty of finding a job in a flooded market one day.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#252

Post by 15457345234 »

maxdoop wrote: post #228
righthand wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude I’m all over this thread because people are responding to me. It’s called conversation. You want me to run and hide because 20 people jumped on me with opposing thoughts? Oh yeah I think Sam is sleazier than most people seem to think. I also don’t think he’s in the right because the board has been quiet. The whole thing is insular and one sided. Everything they’re doing/saying is to try and control the board. Th…

No, I think you're mistaking my tone. I was genuinely curious, because it's rare to see someone with a sure view on this mad saga! And I wanted to learn a bit more from the somewhat-less-popular side (I do think there is an odd cultish energy around Sam at the moment from some folks). I don't know enough about Sam or the board at all, so curious as to reasons why he might be sleazy/sneaky. The board being quiet, in m…

> The board being quiet, in my opinion, is not doing them any favors!

The board being quiet is adult behaviour. Release a discreet and generic press release then direct all further enquiries to the lawyers. That's how things should be done.

The frenzy of reporting and contradictory articles and froth and spin that's coming from the other side makes them look deranged, IMHO. It's incredibly childish and just makes it look like they have tentacles everywhere that they can drag these weird articles out of so many different outlets. It's not a good look unless you're really trying to look like HYDRA.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#253

Post by ebalit »

15457345234 wrote: post #249
ebalit wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not how I interpret the messages from the OpenAI team members. They are sending messages of unity, not fealty to Sam Altman. Working together brought them to the top of the world both in term of research and product. This is a dream come true. What would surprise me is that they wouldn't do everything they can to avoid breaking their team.

Does it not seem odd to you that they all just retweet heart emojis and copy/pasted statements, instead of composing their own separately written statements of support? These are meant to be top-tier researchers, you'd think they'd put their thoughts in their own words. That too would avoid uncertainty and make their position easier to understand. Just retweeting a heart emoji because their dear leader (lol) did it i…

No, what better way to send a message of unity than to all send the same message?

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#254

Post by josephg »

righthand wrote: post #229
josephg wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From where I’m sitting the 90% are replaceable in a flooded market of available software engineers. 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:…

It is not flooded with junior engineers, it's engineers of all skill levels. I happen to know as someone who is senior looking for work right now. Most of the open positions are for senior and staff level positions. Microsoft isn't clambering to hire them, they're clambering for the IP. The OpenAI employees will get significantly less if they go over to Microsoft.

> Most of the open positions are for senior and staff level positions.

So what you're saying is that companies are struggling to find qualified senior and staff level engineers to fill their open roles? Doesn't sound like a flooded market to me.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#256

Post by DonHopkins »

jacquesm wrote: post #238
DonHopkins wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Damn, I was hoping you'd be horrified as a Dutchman.

Hehe, as a Dutchman I wonder how many people pick up on that joke, but yes, chance missed. Too busy. On a less busy day I would have seen my chance and jumped for it. But don't worry, you're not off the hook yet.

You still owe me that dutch rudder.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#257

Post by dgacmu »

endisneigh wrote: post #246
dgacmu wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm objecting to the comment that the remaining board has little to lose. It's possible for sufficiently motivated investors, former board members, and employees to make their life awfully miserable.

How so? They only have themselves to blame. Unless you’re saying they’re going to send death threats?

Defending yourself against several lawsuits can be extremely expensive, not to mention time consuming. While the board members are almost certainly covered by the company's D&O insurance (unless they're not, which would be a ridiculous clown show), there's still a lot of arguing that can happen about which parts are covered by the insurance and which parts may trigger personal liability.

The point is not that these board members would lose the lawsuits - ianal and nobody knows the details well enough - it's that sufficient lawsuits can eat you before you win or lose them if you're not rich. AND subject you to discovery and a huge waste of time.

"I will bury you in legal fees unless you resign" is not a very nice or principled negotiating tactic, but it's a potential one, and it should be weighing pretty heavily on the mind of any board members who don't have a spare million or two to toss in a fire.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#258

Post by clhodapp »

manquer wrote: post #188
clhodapp wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-solicitation agreements are like super-illegal in California. See the "wage fixing" case against Apple, Google, Adobe, Pixar, Intuit, and Intel.

It is different between JV partners or between vendor and customer . If non solicit agreement were not legal for those , consulting companies either tech or management consulting will not be able to operate at all .

Do you mean to say that if non-solicitation agreements were entirely unenforceable, consulting companies would see all of their best consultants poached by clients?

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#259

Post by jejeyyy77 »

thinkindie wrote: post #85
righthand wrote: post #65

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…

Technology is not made out of thin air but it is made - and maintained - by people; and when 500 out of 700 people threaten to quit on the spot and leave for competitors, or for Microsoft, investors might not be happy at all.

Yes but as mentioned most of these people can be replaced.

Re: OpenAI investors keep pushing for Sam Altman’s return

#260

Post by TMWNN »

DebtDeflation wrote: post #166

It's not reported as much as it should be, but at one point in 2021 the OpenAI board had 10 people on it. In the beginning of 2023 it had 9 people. 3 stepped down over the course of 2023 and were not replaced, leaving only 6 in place by the time of last week's fiasco. 2 of the 6 were then removed on Friday leaving 4. The typical large company will have 10-12 people on the board. Apparently, OpenAI's bylaws do not set…

>It's not reported as much as it should be, but at one point in 2021 the OpenAI board had 10 people on it. In the beginning of 2023 it had 9 people. 3 stepped down over the course of 2023 and were not replaced, leaving only 6 in place by the time of last week's fiasco.

Something bothered me when I read the board members' bios after Altman's firing but didn't figure out until today; it's not so much what they say, as much as what they don't say. There is no greybeard, some seasoned current/former C-level at another company (no, the CEO of Quora does not quality). There is no VC representative.

My question: Did the board ever have such people?

(I realize that OpenAI has this weird nonprofit/profit ownership arrangement which I still don't get, and that the VC board members/observers are presumably on the profit side, but that still doesn't answer the implied question!)

Post reply on HN