521–530 of 854 posts
seems to be fairly large amount of evidence that SA is a bit of an asshole.
For someone with his amount of power; if you are only 'a bit of an asshole' you may as well be a saint.
> [W]hen ChatGPT came out November 2022, the board was not informed in advance. We learned about ChatGPT on Twitter,” Jikes. Yeah I can see how a board would lose their sht. Boards are generally quite tolerant unless you keep them in the dark on strategic matters or ask them to rubber stamp stuff post fact.
is that so weird? Aren't board meetings normally once a quarter? ChatGPT may have been built in less than 1 quarter and between board meetings ChatGPT seemed to me like a fun extra product and they didn't anticipate the reaction they would get from the public or that it would completely replace their existing GPT interface
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unsourced legacy media does not qualify as proof.
This isn’t a court and neither of us is a jury. This is an Internet forum where ideally we base our speculations at best on the testimony of credible-ish primary sources rather than any personal agenda even more random . Altman will see his day in court if I have to win a Senate seat to see it happen. That determination will be binding.
Of course there are other court cases like Musk vs OpenAI which may be on the way.
> [W]hen ChatGPT came out November 2022, the board was not informed in advance. We learned about ChatGPT on Twitter,” Jikes. Yeah I can see how a board would lose their sht. Boards are generally quite tolerant unless you keep them in the dark on strategic matters or ask them to rubber stamp stuff post fact.
is that so weird? Aren't board meetings normally once a quarter? ChatGPT may have been built in less than 1 quarter and between board meetings ChatGPT seemed to me like a fun extra product and they didn't anticipate the reaction they would get from the public or that it would completely replace their existing GPT interface
They probably didn’t expect quite that big of a reaction sure but hard to believe they didn’t know at all that it would be important.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For someone with his amount of power; if you are only 'a bit of an asshole' you may as well be a saint.
I have to say that your comment reads like you are justifying unethical behavior from a major business figure. I mean, saying that a CEO who acts with no qualms re accountability "a saint" really begs the question: how does the boot taste like?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd rather not, given that their interests more often than not seem to be at the expense of my interests.
How has Amazon expensed your interests? Most everything I buy, other than food, comes from Amazon. The local supermarket stopped selling laundry powder detergent, so now I push a button on my computer and Amazon drops off a box of Tide the next day. And it's cheaper than what the supermarket used to sell it for, too. Even better - the AMZN stock I bought pays for it! I was looking for an unusual art print the other d…
Amazon product quality is shit. Fakes are prevalent, half of reviews are fake these days, sellers use blatant fraud such as swapping one item listing for something completely different while retaining the existing collection of 5-star reviews etc.
But meanwhile Amazon's sheer size and monopolistic practices (https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/...) mean that alternative choices are often simply not available.
And then that market dominance is itself built on large-scale abuse of its workforce. Which is to say, people who are my neighbors.
Ironically, I used to be a hardcore right libertarian; ancap, even. I just couldn't do it anymore because none of it was possible to reconcile with day-to-day observations. I still believe that free markets are good for the people overall. I just don't see any free markets when I look at capitalism. For a market to be truly free and competitive, there must be a balance of power between the players. We don't have anything even remotely like that - not between capital and labor, and not between large and small capital.
I think there is a very good chance this is true, but it also paints the picture of the board being incompetent and incapable of confrontation. They could have filed formal complaints, mandated increased scrutiny, handed off Sam's responsibilities to other people, or threatened legal action. Instead, they attempted a secret coup, which of course makes Sam look like the underdog
OpenAI is fated to implode in scandal. His 7 trillion dollar funding round ambition is a blaring siren to anyone with a working brain that he’s out of control and capable of doing real damage. He wants a sum of money that could crash the world economy. He thinks he should have the power of the world’s most powerful government. Solely dictated by his whim. He makes Napoleon and Hitler look like pikers.
He is Musk in 2016, when some of us knew who he was, and the fans were still enthralled.
You will look back and say “No one knew” and this comment will be there. We knew.
Musk will end up the Bush to his Trump. We will fondly recall the crimes of a guy who just wasn’t as bad as what followed. Why do you think Musk hates him so much? He’s a better Musk than Musk. He’s the guy who took OpenAI out from under him. It’s envy.
More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40506582
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m no huge fan of the bond villains in general, but this thread isn’t about Musk or whoever being a dick. And even if it were, Musk builds the best rockets ever and stuff like that and to a first approximation knows how they work. Mark at a minimum is the Corp Dev CEO of a generation and I’d argue more. I’d argue he is the first person to create an accurate-ish mental model mapping IRL human mechanism design into a…
It's Gwynne Shotwell, COO of SpaceX, who makes the rockets fly.
It's fascinating how nobody was making this claim of a non-technical Musk up until the moment he stopped being loyal to one particular wing of US politics. Now we see a concerted effort to diminish his achievements. Do you people really think this will work? There is endless testimony from people - independent of Musk and in the space industry - saying that the dude is an honest to god rocket scientist who single-handedly made SpaceX happen through sheer force of will, engineering ability and personal investment. He routinely displays a fluent understanding of orbital mechanics well beyond what any normal CEO would be expected to display. Anyone can read his bio or the testimony of people who work in the space industry and understand that Musk was (and still is) intimately involved in every aspect of SpaceX, down to detailed engineering decisions.
Shotwell meanwhile is regularly described as managing the business development side. She negotiates with customers and oversees day to day operations. This is critical work that she clearly does very well, and she has an engineering background. But I can't find examples of people claiming that she drives product development or overall strategy for SpaceX.