281–290 of 754 posts
Only time will tell, but if this was indeed "just" a coup then it's somewhat likely we're witnessing a variant of the Steve Jobs story all over again. Sam is clearly one of the top product engineering leaders in the world -- few companies could ever match OpenAI's incredible product delivery over the last few years -- and he's also one of the most connected engineering leaders in the industry. He could likely have $5…
I hope they go back to being Open now that Altman is gone. It seems Ilya wants it to 'benefit all of humanity' again.
Isn’t that a bit like stealing from the for-profit investors? I’m not the first one to shed a tear for the super wealthy, but is that even legal? Can a company you invested in just say they don’t like profit any more?
https://images.openai.com/blob/142770fb-3df2-45d9-9ee3-7aa06...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is one OpenAI board member who has an art degree Oh no! Everyone knows that progress is only achieved by people with computer science degrees.
People with zero experience in technology should simply not be allowed to make decisions about it. This is how you get politicians that try to ban encryption to "save the children."
This was a very personal firing in my opinion. Unless other, really damaging behaviors emerge, no responsible board fires their CEO with such a lack of care for the corporate reputation and their partners unless the firing is a personal grievance connected to an internal power play. This should be embarrassing to everyone involved, and sama has a real grievance here. Likely legal repercussions. Of course if they real…
Altman's not going to sue. Right now he has the high ground and the board is the one that looks petty and immature. It would be dumb for him to do anything that reverses this dynamic. Altman is going to move on and announce a new venture in the coming weeks. Whether that venture is in AI or not in AI will be very revealing about what he truly believes are the prospects for the space. Brockman and the others will like…
I admire you but these days dumb is kinda the norm. Look at the other Sam for example. Really hard to keep your mouth shut and do smart things when you think really highly about yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think they want to be shepherding responsible AGI before someone else does so irresponsibly. Is this a thing? This would be like Switzerland in WWII doing nuclear weapons research to try and get there before the Nazis. Would that make any difference whatsoever to the Nazis timeframe? No. I fail to see how the presence of "ethical" AI researchers would slow down in the slightest the bad actors who are certainly ou…
America did nuclear weapons research to get there before the Nazis and Japan and we were able to use them to stop Japan
OpenAI positioned itself like that, much the same way Switzerland does in global politics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless you have something in writing or you have enough ownership to say no, I don’t see how you’d be able to stop it.
Microsoft reportedly invested 13 billion dollars and has a generous profit sharing agreement. They don’t have enough to control OpenAI, but does that mean the company can actively steer away from profit?
Especially since the operating government effectively gives the nonprofit board full control.
> They don’t have enough to control OpenAI, but does that mean the company can actively steer away from profit?
Yes. Explicitly so. https://openai.com/our-structure and particularly https://images.openai.com/blob/142770fb-3df2-45d9-9ee3-7aa06...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
America did nuclear weapons research to get there before the Nazis and Japan and we were able to use them to stop Japan
So the first AGI is going to be used to kill other AGIs in the cradle ?
Any AI researchers still plodding along at mere human speed are then doomed: they won't be able to catch up even if they manage to reproduce the original breakthrough, since the head start enjoyed by AGI #1 guarantees that its latest iteration is always further along the exponential self-improvement curve and therefore superior to any would-be competitor. Being rational(ists), they give up and welcome their new AI overlord.
And if not, the AI god will surely make them see the error of their ways.
I know everybody is going nuts about this, but just from my personal perspective I’ve worked at a variety of companies with “important” CEOs, and in every single one of those cases had the CEO left I would not have cared at all. The CEO always gets way too much credit externally for what the company is doing, it does not mean the CEO is that important. OpenAI might be different, I don’t have any personal experience,…
A deal-making CEO who can carry rapport with the right people, make clever deals, and earn public trust can genuinely make a huge difference to a profit-seeking product company's trajectory. But when your profit-seeking company is owned by a non-profit with a public mission, that trajectory might end up pointed the wrong way. The Dev Day announcements, and especially the marketplace, can be seen as suggesting that's…
Here's what I don't understand. There clearly were tensions between the for and not-for growth factions, but the Dev Day is being cited as a 'last straw'. It was a product launch. Ilya, and the board, should have been well aware of what was being released on that day for months. They should have at the very least been privy to the plan, if not outright sanctioned it. Seems like before launch would have been the time…
