zlacker

[return to "OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO"]
1. gkober+z1[view] [source] 2023-11-18 23:00:36
>>medler+(OP)
I'd bet money Satya was a driver of this reversal.

I genuinely can't believe the board didn't see this coming. I think they could have won in the court of public opinion if their press release said they loved Sam but felt like his skills and ambitions diverged from their mission. But instead, they tried to skewer him, and it backfired completely.

I hope Sam comes back. He'll make a lot more money if he doesn't, but I trust Sam a lot more than whomever they ultimately replace him with. I just hope that if he does come back, he doesn't use it as a chance to consolidate power – he's said in the past it's a good thing the board can fire him, and I hope he finds better board members rather than eschewing a board altogether.

EDIT: Yup, Satya is involved https://twitter.com/emilychangtv/status/1726025717077688662

◧◩
2. mycolo+W3[view] [source] 2023-11-18 23:09:34
>>gkober+z1
> I think they could have won in the court of public opinion ... [but] they tried to skewer him, and it backfired completely

Maybe we have different definitions of "the court of public opinion". Most people don't know who Sam Altman is, and most of the people who do know don't have strong opinions on his performance as OpenAI's CEO. Even on HN, the reaction to the board "skwer[ing] him" has been pretty mixed, and mostly one of confusion and waiting to see what else happens.

This quick a turnaround does make the board look bad, though.

◧◩◪
3. kmlevi+K4[view] [source] 2023-11-18 23:13:50
>>mycolo+W3
What matters is what investors think, and by majority they seem very unhappy with all of this.

Speaking for myself, if they had framed this as a difference in vision, I would be willing to listen. But instead they implied that he had committed some kind of categorical wrongdoing. After it became clear that wasn’t the case, it just made them look incompetent.

◧◩◪◨
4. dannyw+z7[view] [source] 2023-11-18 23:27:01
>>kmlevi+K4
There are no investors in the nonprofit that controls OpenAI, LLC.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. gkober+a9[view] [source] 2023-11-18 23:36:01
>>dannyw+z7
Sure, but Microsoft can sever the relationship if they want to. Thrive can choose to revoke their tender offer, meaning employees won't get the money they were expecting. New firms can decline to ever invest in OpenAI ever again.

There's a lot more to this than who has explicit control.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. cowl+0g[view] [source] 2023-11-19 00:08:37
>>gkober+a9
And I'm sure Google would jump at the occasion to fund the nonprofit and keep MS out while they develop their own. The funding Goal for the openAI was just 1B. Small price to pay for Google to neuter one of it's competitors exclusive access to the GPT model.
[go to top]