zlacker

>>davidb+(OP)
My theory as a pure AGI researcher-- it's because of the AGI lies OpenAI was built on, largely due to Sam.

On one hand, OpenAI is completely (financially) premised on the belief that AGI will change everything, 100x return, etc. but then why did they give up so much control/equity to Microsoft for their money?

Sam finally recently admitted that for OpenAI to achieve AGI they "need another breakthrough," so my guess it's this lie that cost him his sandcastle. I know as a researcher than OpenAI and Sam specifically were lying about AGI.

Screenshot of Sam's quote RE needing another breakthrough for AGI: https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_pr... source: https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/has-sam-altman-gone-full-g...

>>mi3law+fa
OpenAI's board and leadership is made up of plenty of actual AI researchers and experts (e.g. Ilya Sutskever) while Altman is at best a company caretaker. Why would he get fired for statements that they likely directed him to make?

>>paxys+dd
The statement he mad about AGI needing another breakthrough was not a scripted statement, so I don't think he was directed to make it. Watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjpNG0CJRMM&t=3705s

Altman has been at OpenAI since the beginning, and since the beginning OpenAI is heavily premised on AGI/superintelligence.