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

Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 854 posts

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#711

Post by zucker42 »

rPlayer6554 wrote: post #350
zucker42 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Major investors aren't the board's boss in this case because OpenAI is a nonprofit. Microsoft is incentivized to act against the goals nonprofit's charter (and in fact they did in this case).

As much as on paper they aren't the board's boss, based on how events turned out they effectively were. They had leverage over the board to get what they want.

I agree that the board overestimated their own power, and underestimated the need to get their business partners on board with Altman's firing. However, I think calling Microsoft the board's boss implies that Microsoft has some sort of moral or legal high ground.

One way this debacle has been portrayed in the media is "an unaccountable board tried to destroy a profitable company". I think a more accurate portrayal is "Sam Altman and Microsoft worked together to deemphasize the company's scientific and humanitarian goals and emphasize building successful and profitable products". It's sort of depressing how Microsoft was able to "capture" a nonprofit.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#712

Post by bergen »

WalterBright wrote: post #659
bergen wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course you defend yourself and your kind from harm. But that is completely separate from the fact if it is allowed. There is no law in nature preventing this. Sometimes internal conflict is solved by violence and accepted. Your first paragraph describes a group sharing a common will and organisation based on natural instinct (like a hive of bees), your second paragraph disputes this organisation as a group for hum…

> decide for one it can’t be both ways Oh, it can be both ways and is both ways. See my last sentence again, about the compelling evidence that humans thrive with their rights being protected, while a beehive thrives from being a perfect communist society. Communism requires people to behave like bees in a beehive, and that will never work no matter how fervently one believes in communism and no matter how much coerc…

I really don't understand what you are on about. A beehive is the very definition of 100 percent following natural law. A beehive protects it's worker when a worker is attacked, following your line of argument then, this beehive is somehow capitalist and has rights? At the same time you're arguing that this swarm of animals doesn't follow the law of nature and therefore is communist which at best bizarre and at worst delusional.

Your mashing togehter things without any coherent explanation what you mean. Also you fail to provide a simple example beyond "the evidence is clear" you don't even say what evidence you're refering to.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#713

Post by zucker42 »

cvalka wrote: post #202
light_triad wrote: post #191

The whole saga is an interesting case study for theoretical versus real power. On paper the board has the power and it’s their job to monitor and hire/fire the execs. But they’re dependent on the execs for info. Also having one investor own half, plus the founders guiding the roadmap and having sway over key hires leaving is where the real power is…

They just folded. They were not the right people for the task. They would have prevailed with a bit more persistence and better PR.

Exactly. If the board had the reasons in this article ready to go when they fired Altman, things may have gone much differently.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#714

Post by IAmNotACellist »

kranke155 wrote: post #592

All evidence points to Altman being lying and duplicitous. I would have fired him too.

The guy who was kicked out of two countries for refusing to obey government orders to stop scanning people's eyes in exchange for shitcoin? That guy, lying, duplicitous?

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#715

Post by pests »

exitheone wrote: post #386
pests wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh okay then we should just dismiss it?

"we" as in "a group of people not in a position to provide any evidence or investigate"? Yes, absolutely, because all "we" would be adding to the conversation is speculation. No new information can be gained here.

Who said "we" were going to investigate or speculate?

There is a difference between a witch hunt and making sure underheard voices get attention.

I was suggesting "we" make sure these claims are not being ignored because they are against a public figure. The fact they are a public figure and "might get blackmailed all the time" doesn't somehow relieve a person of criticism. That "we" ensure the proper authorities and groups prioritize finding new information or investigate these claims instead of being swept under a rug.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#716

Post by archagon »

WalterBright wrote: post #438
int_19h wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> societies without wealth disparity end up poorly for everyone. As in starving. If this is meant to be a reference to Soviet-style communism, then all that shows is that centrally planned economies run by dictators end up poorly for everyone. They don't end up without wealth disparity, though. In fact, USSR had the highest wealth disparity at "peak communism" under Stalin, when well-off party bureaucrats and high-ra…

It's all communist societies. For voluntary communes, they usually break up once they discover they cannot feed themselves.

Citation needed.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#717

Post by jeffrallen »

trogdor wrote: post #704
jeffrallen wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have ever been responsible for managing the security of your team in the face of rumors, this conversation rings of truth. The humanitarian organization I worked for eradicated every last small-head US dollar from circulation in our salary payments in 24 hours because the staff brought us a rumour that was circulating in the market that small-head dollars would not be accepted by the banks anymore. Rumors can…

What humanitarian organization did you work for that pays its employees in cash?

There are times and places where banks are not operating. In those places you work with cash.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#718

Post by Log_out_ »

azinman2 wrote: post #633
Log_out_ wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the realm of invisible monopolies and quasi-state owned the privately owned individual is only half blind.

What does that even mean? Your structural setting changed your success potential? China would disagree. Besides… Blue origin? Boeing? These are not state owned or “invisible” yet are failing.

A pension fund is a conservative entity interested in stability above all things, with longterm planning, rulebooks, almost like a small state. The line between public and private is very blurry by now and that blurryness goes both ways. Get public funding long enough and you loose your agency to become a bureau of everything nihilitary gone.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#719

Post by WalterBright »

bergen wrote: post #712
WalterBright wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> decide for one it can’t be both ways Oh, it can be both ways and is both ways. See my last sentence again, about the compelling evidence that humans thrive with their rights being protected, while a beehive thrives from being a perfect communist society. Communism requires people to behave like bees in a beehive, and that will never work no matter how fervently one believes in communism and no matter how much coerc…

I really don't understand what you are on about. A beehive is the very definition of 100 percent following natural law. A beehive protects it's worker when a worker is attacked, following your line of argument then, this beehive is somehow capitalist and has rights? At the same time you're arguing that this swarm of animals doesn't follow the law of nature and therefore is communist which at best bizarre and at worst…

Bees have followed a different evolutionary path than humans, and have reached a different local optima. Communism is "natural law" for bees.

Communism works for bees, it does not work for humans, because humans have not evolved into a beehive.

Re: Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting

#720

Post by cma »

1024core wrote: post #135

> As staff threatened to quit and speculation swirled that Microsoft may poach Altman's team from OpenAI and hire him directly, the company's board brought back Altman as CEO less than a week later. To me, this is an important part of the story too, which Toner doesn't go into. I wonder why?

It was self interest (against a threatened harm, not for additional money); she went into it at the time:

> “He was trying to claim that it would be illegal for us not to resign immediately, because if the company fell apart we would be in breach of our fiduciary duties,” Toner said. “But OpenAI is a very unusual organization, and the nonprofit mission — to ensure [artificial general intelligence] benefits all of humanity — comes first.”

> Toner said she viewed the lawyer’s words as an “intimidation tactic” — and replied that Altman’s removal would “actually be consistent with the mission” of the nonprofit to ensure AI safety above an individual company’s success.

https://nypost.com/2023/12/08/business/ex-openai-board-membe... https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/helen-toner-openai-board-2e4031e...

Post reply on HN