zlacker

[return to "Ilya Sutskever "at the center" of Altman firing?"]
1. convex+X1[view] [source] 2023-11-18 02:56:12
>>apsec1+(OP)
Sutskever: "You can call it (a coup), and I can understand why you chose this word, but I disagree with this. This was the board doing its duty to the mission of the nonprofit, which is to make sure that OpenAI builds AGI that benefits all of humanity."

Scoop: theinformation.com

https://twitter.com/GaryMarcus/status/1725707548106580255

◧◩
2. peyton+G3[view] [source] 2023-11-18 03:09:22
>>convex+X1
Very unprofessional way to approach this disagreement.
◧◩◪
3. anonym+24[view] [source] 2023-11-18 03:11:55
>>peyton+G3
How so? It's just another firing and being escorted out the door.
◧◩◪◨
4. janeje+O4[view] [source] 2023-11-18 03:16:36
>>anonym+24
The wording is very clearly hostile and aggressive, especially for a formal statement, and the wording, again, makes it very clear that they are burning all bridges with Sam Altman, and it is very clear that 1. it was done extremely suddenly, 2. with very little notice or discussion with any other stakeholder (e.g. Microsoft being completely blindsided, not even waiting 30 minutes for the stock market to close, doing this shortly before Thanksgiving break, etc).

You don't really see any of this in most professional settings.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. clnq+29[view] [source] 2023-11-18 03:47:52
>>janeje+O4
It is quite gauche for a company to burn bridges with their upper management. This bodes poorly for ever hoping to attract executives in the future. Even Bobby Kotick got a more graceful farewell from Activision Blizzard, where they tried to clear his name. It is only prudent business.

Certainly, this is very immature. It wouldn't be out of context in HBO's Succession.

Whether what happened is right or just in some sense is a different conversation. We could speculate on what is going on in the company and why, but the tactlessness is evident.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. riboso+1d[view] [source] 2023-11-18 04:19:27
>>clnq+29
> Whether it's right or just in some sense is a different conversation.

The same conversation if it's "mature", surely? I'm failing to see how one thinks turning a blind eye to like, decades of sexual impropriety and major internal culture issues to the point the state takes action against your company is "mature". Like, under what definition?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. clnq+5g[view] [source] 2023-11-18 04:41:08
>>riboso+1d
Mature, as in the opposite of ingenuous. It does no good to harm a company further. Kotick did enough damage, he left, all that needed to be said about him was said, tirelessly. Every effort to get him to offer some reparations - expended.

So what was there to gain from the company speaking ill of their past employee? What was even left to say? Nothing. No one wants to work in an organization that vilifies its own people. It was prudent.

I will emphasize again that the morality of these situations is a separate matter from tact. It is very well possible that doing what is good for business does not always align with what is moral. But does this come as a surprise to anyone?

We can recognize that the situation is not one dimensional and not reduce it to such. The same applies to the press release from Open AI - it is graceless, that much can be observed. But we do not yet know whether it is reprehensible, exemplary, or somewhere in between in the sense of morality and justice. It will come out, in other channels rather than official press releases, like in Bobby's case.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. watwut+iK[view] [source] 2023-11-18 09:02:11
>>clnq+5g
> Mature, as in the opposite of ingenuous

To tell it in an exaggerated way, maturity should not imply sociopathy or completely disregard for everything.

Obviously I am referring here to Kottick situation. But, the definition where it is immature to tell the truth and mature to enable powerful bad players is wrong definition of maturity.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. clnq+J81[view] [source] 2023-11-18 12:18:19
>>watwut+iK
I respect your belief that maturity involves elevating morality above corporate sagacity. It is noble.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. watwut+py1[view] [source] 2023-11-18 14:53:12
>>clnq+J81
I am not even demanding something super noble from mature people. I am fine with the idea that mature people do compromises. I do not expect managers to be saint like fighters for justice.

But, when people use "maturity" as argument for why someone must be enabler, should not do the morally or ethically right thing, then it gets irritating. Conversely, calling people "immature" because they did not acted in the most self serving but sleazy way is ridiculous.

[go to top]