601–610 of 1001 posts
Is Ilya off the board then?
Why is Adam still on?
Brett and Larry are good choices, but they need to get that board up to 10 or so people representing a balance of perspectives and interests very quickly.
Disappointing outcome. The process has conclusively confirmed that OpenAI is in fact not open and that it is effectively controlled by Microsoft. Furthermore, the overwhelming groupthink shows there's clearly little critical thinking amongst OpenAI's employees either. It might not seem like the case right now, but I think the real disruption is just about to begin. OpenAI does not have in its DNA to win, they're too…
> there's clearly little critical thinking amongst OpenAI's employees either. That they reached a different conclusion than the outcome you wished for does not indicate a lack of critical thinking skills. They have a different set of information than you do, and reached a different conclusion.
The media and the VCs are treating Sam like some hero and savior of AI. I’m not getting it. What has he done in life and/or AI to deserve so much respect and admiration? Why don’t top researchers and scientists get equivalent (if not more) respect, admiration and support? It looks like one should strive to become product manager, not an engineer or a scientist.
The media and the VCs are treating Sam like some hero and savior of AI. I’m not getting it. What has he done in life and/or AI to deserve so much respect and admiration? Why don’t top researchers and scientists get equivalent (if not more) respect, admiration and support? It looks like one should strive to become product manager, not an engineer or a scientist.
That being said, I have no idea of this guy's contributions. It's easy to dismiss entrepreneur/managers because they're not top scientists, but they also have very rare skills and without them, projects don't get done.
"A source with direct knowledge of the negotiations says that the sole job of this initial board is to vet and appoint a new formal board of up to 9 people that will reset the governance of OpenAl. Microsoft will likely have a seat on that expanded board, as will Altman himself." https://twitter.com/teddyschleifer/status/172721237871736880...
So basically, the outcome of this drama is that Microsoft gets more power without having to invest anything?
as this event turned into a farce, it's evident that neither the company nor it's key investors accounted much for the "bus factor/problem" i.e loosing a key-person threatened to destroy the whole enterprise.
for me this a failure in Managing Risk 101.
The media and the VCs are treating Sam like some hero and savior of AI. I’m not getting it. What has he done in life and/or AI to deserve so much respect and admiration? Why don’t top researchers and scientists get equivalent (if not more) respect, admiration and support? It looks like one should strive to become product manager, not an engineer or a scientist.
> It looks like one should strive to become product manager, not an engineer or a scientist. In my experience, product people who know what they are doing have a huge impact on the success of a company, product, or service. They also point engineering efforts in the right direction, which in turn also motivate engineers. I saw good product people leaving completely destroy a team, never seen that happen with a good e…
I have yet to find a product person that was not involved in the inception of the idea that is actually good (hell, even some founders fail spectacularly here).
Perhaps I'm simply unlucky.
Disappointing outcome. The process has conclusively confirmed that OpenAI is in fact not open and that it is effectively controlled by Microsoft. Furthermore, the overwhelming groupthink shows there's clearly little critical thinking amongst OpenAI's employees either. It might not seem like the case right now, but I think the real disruption is just about to begin. OpenAI does not have in its DNA to win, they're too…
Why did I say that? Look at the product release by the competitors these past few days. 2nd, Sam pushing for AI chips implies that chatGPT's future breakthroughs are hardware bounded. Hence, the road to AGI is not through chatGPT.