zlacker

>>apsec1+(OP)
Here's my preferred theory, it's a tale as old as time. Sam Altman, like Icarus, flew too close to Microsoft's giant pot of money. He pivoted the company away from it's founding mission, unleashing the very djinn they originally set out to harness. Turns out there were people at OpenAI who really believed in the original vision.

>>OscarT+cx
Or was it that he's been seen trying to raise money for an AI chip startup to compete with Nvidia or was courting SoftBank for a multibillion-dollar investment in a new company to make AI-oriented hardware with Jony Ive?

A lot of his current external activities could worry the board - and if he wasn't candid about future plans I can see why they might sack him.

>>helsin+aH
What's always incredible to me is how much "outside activity" is tolerated of tech CEOs. I get it, they are at the top, they make the rules, but wow.

Even a lowly new grad engineer has to sign a lot of stuff when they take a job that forces essentially exclusivity to your work there. I cannot dabble in outside businesses within the same industry or adjacent industries.

CEOs argue that their job is tough and many hours and life consuming and that's why they get the pay, and yet there is a whole genre of tech CEOs who try to CEO 5 companies at a time..

>>steveB+wr1
It's critical to know: where are you located? lowly new grad engineers, as well as senior architects, can't be covered in non-competes in California, as long as it's done on non-company hardewre. it's a large part of why California is so big for tech, and subject of a current front page discussion.

>>38316870

>>fragme+tP1
Employers can make provisions that you’re not allowed to moonlight in other positions. That’s distinct from non-competes, which are for your ability to change jobs entirely. The parent’s point is that tech CEOs are often permitted to work at multiple companies and engage in self-dealing in a way that’s prohibited for almost everyone else, including CEOs in other industries.