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

OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 946 posts

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#351

Post by arduanika »

DebtDeflation wrote: post #172

1) Where is Emmett? He's the CEO now. It's his job to be the public face of the company. The company is in an existential crisis and there have been no public statements after his 1AM tweet. 2) Where is the board? At a bare minimum, issue a public statement that you have full faith in the new CEO and the leadership team, are taking decisive action to stabilize the situation, and have a plan to move the company forwar…

Here he is! Blathering about AI doom 4 months ago, spitting Yudkowsky talking points:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ2xw_1_KHY

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#352

Post by maxlamb »

tock wrote: post #345

So both Mira and Ilya voted to kick Sam out. And are now on team Sam. This makes absolutely no sense. Why did they vote yes in the first place then?

My understanding now is that Mira was not on the board so she did not vote.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#353

Post by lolinder »

Davidzheng wrote: post #253
lolinder wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most chilling line in the open letter is this one, which I haven't heard anyone talking about: > You also informed the leadership team that allowing the company to be destroyed “would be consistent with the mission.”

This could be a genuine stance for them if they are really in the AI danger camp. Not supporting the stance; but i think it's not a self contradictory position

Oh, definitely not self-contradictory!

In retrospect it's a mistaken position, because it's pretty obvious now that if OpenAI disintegrates it will be as an exodus to Microsoft, which will undoubtedly be a worse steward, but I think it's an ethically consistent position to hold, in a naive sort of way. That's part of why I believe they actually said something like this.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#354

Post by vaxman »

pacificmint wrote: post #258
gongagong wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wait so can't SA sue for wrongful termination if everything is as bogus as everyone is saying? same for MS

Employment in California is ‘at will’, which means they can fire him without a reason. Wrongful termination only applies when someone is fired for illegal reasons, like racial discrimination, or retaliation, for example. I mean I’m sure they can all sue each other for all kinds of reasons, but firing someone without a good reason isn’t really one of them.

You mean like being fired by a board member as part of their scheme to breach their fiduciary duty by launching a competitive product in another company?

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#355

Post by adastra22 »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #120
samspenc wrote: post #23

> One explanation was that Altman was said to have given two people at OpenAI the same project. Have these people never worked at any other company before? Probably every company with more than 10 employees does something like this.

>Have these people never worked at any other company before? Half the board has not had a real job ever. I’m serious.

And the one which does have a real job is a direct competitor with OpenAI.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#356

Post by nemo44x »

anupamchugh wrote: post #334
aravindgp wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly my point why would d Angelo want openai to thrive when his own company poe(chatbot) wants compete in the same space. Its conflict of interest which ever way you look. He should resign from board of openai in the first place. The main point is greg, Ilya can get 50% vote and convince Helen toner to change decision. It's all done then it's 3 to 2 in board of 5 people. Unless greg board membership is reinstated.…

There’s lots of conflicts of interests beyond Adam and his Poe AI. Yes, he was building a commerical bot using OpenAI APIs, but Sam was apparently working on other side ventures too. And Sam was the person who invested in Quora during his YC tenure, and must have had a say in bringing him onboard. At this point, the spotlight is on most members of the nonprofit board

I wouldn’t hold Sam bringing him over in too high a regard. Fucking each other over is a sport in Silicon Valley. You’re subservient exactly until the moment you sense an opportunity to dominate. It’s just business.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#358

Post by lumost »

swatcoder wrote: post #107
DebtDeflation wrote: post #89

>Sustkever is said to have offered two explanations he purportedly received from the board He received from the board? Here we go again with the narrative that Ilya was a bystander, at most an unwilling participant. He was a member of the board, on equal footing with the other board members, and his vote to oust Sam was necessary for there to be a majority.

Altman et al have been driving coordinated PR all weekend, and it's clear from his regrets tweet and the employee petition that Sustkever has now taken solidarity with Altman, so you would expect Altman's PR engine to start trying to restore Sustkever's image as they provide tips and comments to reporters.

It’s also not unreasonable that the Altman camp pushed on Ilya first as he was the most likely to switch his vote. D’Angelo is suddenly in the cross hairs for conflict of interest. If he’s taken off the board - then the remaining two members can vote provided there is no quorum rule.

Alternately, the goal is to drive so much ambiguity into the boards decision that MSFT files a lawsuit.

/end rampant speculation.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#359

Post by doktrin »

015a wrote: post #324
hal009 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As mentioned by another person in this thread [0], it is likely that it was Ilya's work that was getting replicated by another "secret" team, and the "different opinions on the same person" was Sam's opinions of Ilya. Perhaps Sam saw him as an unstable element and a single point of failure in the company, and wanted to make sure that OpenAI would be able to continue without Ilya? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/repl…

This is an interesting theory when combined with this tweet from Google DeepMind's team lead of Scalable Alignment [1]. [1] https://twitter.com/geoffreyirving/status/172675427761849141... The "Sam is actually a psychopath that has managed to swindle his way into everyone liking him, and Ilya has grave ethical concerns about that kind of person leading a company seeking AGI, but he can't out him publicly because so ma…

Interesting. I’m glad he shared his perspective despite the ambiguity.

Re: OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

#360

Post by adastra22 »

pacificmint wrote: post #258
gongagong wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wait so can't SA sue for wrongful termination if everything is as bogus as everyone is saying? same for MS

Employment in California is ‘at will’, which means they can fire him without a reason. Wrongful termination only applies when someone is fired for illegal reasons, like racial discrimination, or retaliation, for example. I mean I’m sure they can all sue each other for all kinds of reasons, but firing someone without a good reason isn’t really one of them.

That's the default, but employment contracts can override this. C-level employment contracts almost universally have special consideration for "Termination Without Cause", aka golden parachutes. He could sue to make them pay out.

He would also have very good grounds for a civil suit for disparagement. Or at least he would have if Microsoft didn't immediately step up and offer him the world.

Post reply on HN