541–550 of 711 posts
I’m not making any judgement about whether they made the correct decision. I’m just stating that everyone keeps talking about this as if it were a normal company structure and it absolutely is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you forgetting its a nonprofit? How could the board be fired? What does their charter say is the mechanism for removing a board member?
Yeah, I misspoke earlier. Although nobody has actual power on paper, public and investor pressure can be just as influential.
Everyone seems to have lost their mind missing this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am either skeptical or envious of such claims. Someone coding so much would quickly be launched into meetings to communicate one's results and to coordinate with others. It would be my life's dream to spend 80 hours per week coding without having to communicate with others... but no one is an island...
It's possible, but harder than almost any other role. There are people at Google/Meta like this. Usually E7/E8 levels, "coding machines". It's much easier to go into a pseudo PM/TL/Director role though to hit those levels and income, so it's uncommon. You really have to have a passion for coding to put in the hours and be very good at it. Incredibly rare, believe it or not. Lots of people think they are good coders b…
Management and leadership of a team has a way bigger impact than any single individual contributor could ever have. Humans are generally limited not by intelligence but by motivation and vision. Directing people to achieve what you want is what allows the scaling of innovation.
Hero worship is a very human thing, but unscientific.
This is Olek Madry and Jakub Pachocki we are talking about. Check out their respective dblps if you don't get it. It's a kind of loss that will be hard to recover from. In relation to other comments here. There is "coding" and there is "God's spark genius of algorithms" kind of work. This is what made the magic of OpenAI. Believe me, those guys were not "just coding". My bet is that it could be all about some researc…
> There is "coding" and there is "God's spark genius of algorithms" kind of work. I really don't buy that for a second. Most of OpenAI's value compared to any competitor comes from the money they spent hiring humans to trawl through training data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I misspoke earlier. Although nobody has actual power on paper, public and investor pressure can be just as influential.
Could Microsoft not hire Sam (reporting directly to Satya) and those who departed and equip them with compute access and ancillary resources? It seems less of a lift than salvaging the OpenAI situation internally due to the emotions and politics involved, non competes not existing in California (broadly speaking), and the logistics of attempting to apply pressure to a 501c3 board with very little leverage. The value…
Technically speaking, only because PR has been replaced by ChatGPT :-)
This is escalating rather quickly. It is an incredibly irresponsible move by the OpenAI board. Hypergrowing company, and now they managed to shake up their user's trust in leadership stability. This has Adam's (D'Angelo) fingerprints all over it (for context, he did overthrow his co-founder, and Quora has been struggling ever since). This guy shouldn't sit on any board ever again. I predict the board will be fired, a…
> and now they managed to shake up their user's trust in leadership stability Do users care about that? I care about features stability and avoidance of shitification. That's why I am usually preferring open models to depending on OpenAI's API. This drama has me curious about the outcome and if it leads to more openness from OpenAI, it may gain me back as a user.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps you could argue that he wants to stick with Sam and the others because if they start a company that competes with OpenAI, there’s a real chance they catch up and surpass OpenAI. If you really want to be a voice for safety, it’ll be most effective if you’re on the winning team.
One funny detail is that the OpenAI charter states that, if this happens, they will stop their own work and help the organisation that is closest to achieving OpenAI's stated goal.
Ilya’s job won’t survive this power play……. Satya has been humiliated and will be furious.
What mechanism does Satya have to do anything here? Microsoft has a minority stake in the for-profit subsidiary that is wholly controlled by the 501(c)(3). All investors (and employees) in the for-profit have to agree to the operating agreement that specifies the for-profit is not actually obligated to actually make a profit and that it is all secondary the charter the non-profit operates under. https://openai.com/ou…
I think people seriously underestimate how hard it is to get the GPU compute/etc that is necessary to be useful here. Lead time would be years, easily, even if you had the money. NVidia can't change this for you even if they liked you - they literally can't build chips fast enough.
Depending on the exact agreement, Microsoft may have just given them credits/free use, and the part where they make sure the resources are actually available is just good faith that may no longer exist.
That's one example.
Even beyond that, you are assuming they can only do super-direct things, but it turns out to be fairly easy to make things very uncomfortable for people/companies indirectly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft will partner with them if they start a new company I reckon, 100%. And Microsoft are risk adverse enough that I think they do care about AI safety, even if only from a "what's best for the business" standpoint. Tbh idc if we get AGI. There'll be a point in the future where we have AGI and the technology is accessible enough that anybody can create one. We need to stop this pointless bickering over this sort…
Isn’t that the exact point - an AGI won’t need a human at the helm.