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

841–850 of 1001 posts

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

#841

Post by jkaplan »

jxi wrote: post #805
jafitc wrote: post #760

OpenAI's Future and Viability - OpenAI has damaged their brand and lost trust, but may still become a hugely successful company if they build great products - OpenAI looks stronger now with a more professional board, but has fundamentally transformed into a for-profit focused on commercializing LLMs - OpenAI still retains impressive talent and technology assets and could pivot into a leading AI provider if managed we…

Was this really motivated by AI safety or was it just Helen Toner’s personal vendetta against Sam? It doesn’t feel like anything was accomplished besides wasting 700+ people’s time, and the only thing that has changed now is Helen Toner and Tasha McCauley are off the board.

> was it just Helen Toner’s personal vendetta against Sam

I'm not defending the board's actions, but if anything, it sounds like it may have been the reverse? [1]

> In the email, Mr. Altman said that he had reprimanded Ms. Toner for the paper and that it was dangerous to the company... “I did not feel we’re on the same page on the damage of all this,” he wrote in the email. “Any amount of criticism from a board member carries a lot of weight." Senior OpenAI leaders, including Mr. Sutskever... later discussed whether Ms. Toner should be removed

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/21/technology/openai-altman-...

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

#842

Post by TheGRS »

RationalDino wrote: post #828
jafitc wrote: post #760

OpenAI's Future and Viability - OpenAI has damaged their brand and lost trust, but may still become a hugely successful company if they build great products - OpenAI looks stronger now with a more professional board, but has fundamentally transformed into a for-profit focused on commercializing LLMs - OpenAI still retains impressive talent and technology assets and could pivot into a leading AI provider if managed we…

The one piece of this that I question is the employee motivations. First, they had offers to walk to both Microsoft and Salesforce and be made good. They didn't have to stay and fight to have money and careers. But more importantly, put yourself in the shoes of an employee and read https://web.archive.org/web/20231120233119/https://www.busin... for what they apparently heard. I don't know about anyone else. But if I…

I was thinking the same. The letter symbolized a deep distrust with leadership over the mission and direction of the company. I’m sure financial motivations were involved, but the type of person working at this company can probably get a good paycheck at a lot of places. I think many work at OpenAI for some combination of opportunity, prestige, and altruism, and the weekend probably put all 3 into question.

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

#843

Post by intended »

zug_zug wrote: post #757
intended wrote: post #203

From a business sense, Satya was excellent. He made the right calls, fast, with limited information. Things further shifted from plan a to b to… whatever this is. Despite that, MSFT still came out on top. Consider if Satya didn’t say anything. Suppose MSFT stood back and let things play out. That’s a gap for google or some competitor to make a move. To showcase their stability and long term business friendly vision.…

I am not sure why people keep pushing this narrative. It's not obviously false, but there doesn't seem to be much evidence of it. From where I sit Satya possibly messed up big. He clearly wanted Sam and the Open AI team to join microsoft and they won't now, likely ever. By offering a standing offer to join MS publicly he gave Sam and OpenAI employees huge leverage to force the board's hand. If he had waited then mayb…

Its very easy to min max a situation if you are not on the other side.

Additionally - I have not seen someone else talk about this, its just been a few days. Calling it a narrative is a stretch, and dismissive by implying manipulation.

Finally why would Sam joining MSFT be better than this current situation?

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

#844

Post by [deleted] »

RationalDino wrote: post #828
jafitc wrote: post #760

OpenAI's Future and Viability - OpenAI has damaged their brand and lost trust, but may still become a hugely successful company if they build great products - OpenAI looks stronger now with a more professional board, but has fundamentally transformed into a for-profit focused on commercializing LLMs - OpenAI still retains impressive talent and technology assets and could pivot into a leading AI provider if managed we…

The one piece of this that I question is the employee motivations. First, they had offers to walk to both Microsoft and Salesforce and be made good. They didn't have to stay and fight to have money and careers. But more importantly, put yourself in the shoes of an employee and read https://web.archive.org/web/20231120233119/https://www.busin... for what they apparently heard. I don't know about anyone else. But if I…

[deleted]

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

#845

Post by mwattsun »

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.

Microsoft doesn't have to send an employee to represent them on the board. They could ask Bill Gates.

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

#847

Post by flappyeagle »

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…

Amazing outcome. Empty shirts folded. People who get stuff done persevere.

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

#849

Post by jjk166 »

gandutraveler wrote: post #685
flylib wrote: post #111

"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...

They need a common man representing the board. After all AI will take those jobs. I can be that common man

Plot twist: that's the very first job the AI will be taking.

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

#850

Post by hackernewds »

stetrain wrote: post #827
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.

Imagine if the board of Apple fired Tim Cook with no warning right after he went on stage and announced their new developer platform updates for the year alongside record growth and sales, refused to elaborate as to the reasons or provide any useful communications to investors over several days, and replaced their first interim CEO with another interim CEO from a completely different kind of business in that same wee…

It is prudent to recall that enhancing shareholder value and delivering record growth and sales are NOT the mission of the company or Board. But now it appears that it will have to be.
Post reply on HN