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

We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 1001 posts

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#691

Post by chollida1 »

Satam wrote: post #215

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…

> The process has conclusively confirmed that OpenAI is in fact not open and that it is effectively controlled by Microsoft.

What leads you to make such a definitive statement? To me the process shows that Microsoft has no pull in OpenAI.

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#692

Post by 627467 »

eclectic29 wrote: post #196

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.

A CEO is not a researcher. A researcher can be a CEO but in doing so stops being a researcher.

Maybe (almost certainly) Sam is not a savior/hero, but he doesn't need to be a savior/hero. He just needs to gather more support than the opposition (the now previous board). And even if you don't know any details of this story, enough insiders who know more than any of us of what happens inside oai - including hundred of researchers - decided to support the "savior/hero". It's less about Sam and more about an incompetent board. Some of those board members are top researchers. And they are now on the losing camp.

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#693

Post by nojvek »

What this proves is that OpenAI interests are now entrenched with profit.

I’m assuming most of the researchers there probably realize there is a loooot of money to be made and they have to optimize for that.

They are deffo pushing the frontier of AI.

However I wish OpenAI doesn’t get to AGI first.

I don’t think it will be the best for all of humanity.

I’m scared.

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#694

Post by lysecret »

laserlight wrote: post #236

With Sam coming back as CEO, hasn't OpenAI board proven that it has lost its function? Regardless of who is in the board, they won't be able to exercise one of the most fundamental of their rights, firing the CEO, because Sam has proven that he is unfireable. Now, Sam can do however he pleases, whether it is lying, not reporting, etc. To be clear, I don't claim that Sam did, or will, lie, or misbehave.

No the board is just one instance. It doesn’t and shouldn’t have absolute power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

There ist the board the investors the employees the senior management.

All other parties aligned against it and thus it couldn’t act. If only Sam would have rebelled. Or even just Sam and the investors (without the employees) nothing would have happened.

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#696

Post by vlad_ungureanu »

busyant wrote: post #642
eclectic29 wrote: post #196

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.

> Why don’t top researchers and scientists get equivalent (if not more) respect, admiration and support? I can't believe I'm about to defend VCs and "senior management" but here goes. I've worked for two start-ups in my life. The first start-up had dog-shit technology (initially) and top-notch management. CEO told me early on that VCs invest on the quality of management because they trust good senior executives to hi…

Interesting, I always thought that research and startups are very similar. Where you have something (product/research-idea) which you think is novel and try to sell it (journals/customers).

The management skills which you potentiated differentiated the success of the two firms. I can see how the lack of this might be wildly spread out in academia.

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#697

Post by kromem »

jatins wrote: post #479
Satam wrote: post #215

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…

> Furthermore, the overwhelming groupthink shows there's clearly little critical thinking amongst OpenAI's employees either. If the "other side" (board) had put up a SINGLE convincing argument on why Sam had to go maybe the employees would have not supported Sam unequivocally. But, atleast as an outsider, we heard nothing that suggests board had reasons to remove Sam other than "the vibes were off" Can you really acc…

I agree with both the commenter above you and you.

Yes, you are right that the board had weak sauce reasoning for the firing (giving two teams the same project!?!).

That said, the other commenter is right that this is the beginning of the end.

One of the interesting things over the past few years watching the development of AI has been that in parallel to the demonstration of the limitations of neural networks has been many demonstrations of the limitations of human thinking and psychology.

Altman just got given a blank check and crowned as king of OpenAI. And whatever opposition he faced internally just lost all its footing.

That's a terrible recipe for long term success.

Whatever the reasons for the firing, this outcome is going to completely screw their long term prospects, as no matter how wonderful a leader someone is, losing the reality check of empowered opposition results in terrible decisions being made unchecked.

He's going to double down on chat interfaces because that's been their unexpected bread and butter up until the point they get lapped by companies with broader product vision, and whatever elements at OpenAI shared that broader vision are going to get steamrolled now that he's been given an unconditional green light until they jump ship over the next 18 months to work elsewhere.

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#698

Post by baxtr »

Satam wrote: post #215

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…

Based on the spectacular drama we were allowed to observe:

For a company at the forefront of AI it’s actually very, very human.

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#699

Post by [deleted] »

kmlevitt wrote: post #354
laserlight wrote: post #236

With Sam coming back as CEO, hasn't OpenAI board proven that it has lost its function? Regardless of who is in the board, they won't be able to exercise one of the most fundamental of their rights, firing the CEO, because Sam has proven that he is unfireable. Now, Sam can do however he pleases, whether it is lying, not reporting, etc. To be clear, I don't claim that Sam did, or will, lie, or misbehave.

This is a better deal for the board and a worse one for Sam than people realize. Sam and Greg and even Ilya are both off the board, D'Angelo gets to stay on despite his outrageous actions, and he gets veto power over who the new board members will be and a big say in who gets voted on to the board next. Everybody's guard is going to be up around Sam from now on. He'll have much less leverage over this board than he d…

[deleted]

Re: We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam to return to OpenAI as CEO

#700

Post by flagrant_taco »

garrison wrote: post #637

If OpenAI remains a 501(c)(3) charity, then any employee of Microsoft on the board will have a fiduciary duty to advance the mission of the charity, rather than the business needs of Microsoft. There are obvious conflicts of interest here. I don't expect the IRS to be a fan of this arrangement.

I don't expect the government to regulate any of this aggressively. AI is much to important to the government and military to allow pesky conflicts of interest to slow down any competitive advantage we may have.
Post reply on HN