zlacker

>>davidb+(OP)
- Cant be a personal scandal, press release would be worded much more differently

- Board is mostly independent and those independent dont have equity

- They talk about not being candid - this is legalese for “lying”

The only major thing that could warrant something like this is Sam going behind the boards back to make a decision (or make progress on a decision) that is misaligned with the Charter. Thats the only fireable offense that warrants this language.

My bet: Sam initiated some commercial agreement (like a sale) to an entity that would have violated the “open” nature of the company. Likely he pursued a sale to Microsoft without the board knowing.

>>baidif+aq
Eric Schmidt calling Sam a hero also makes me think it isn't a personal scandal.

>>hacker+bs
This doesn’t make sense to me. It assumes Schmidt has inside info on why Altman was fired.

>>next_x+dw
Of course he has. Why would he risk political capital by defending sama publicly if he didn’t know for sure he wouldn’t get burned by defending him?

>>carlos+Yy
Maybe because it's not risking very much political capital. If he's wrong, and shuts up (rather than doubling down on it), nobody will remember what he said in two weeks.

Hell, some prominent tech people are often loudly wrong, and loudly double down on their wrong-ness, and still end up losing very little of their political capital in the long run.

Or maybe he's right. We don't know, we're all just reading tea leaves.