zlacker

[return to "OpenAI board in discussions with Sam Altman to return as CEO"]
1. shmatt+by[view] [source] 2023-11-19 02:10:04
>>medler+(OP)
This makes no sense. People are calling what the board did a coup, but Altman is trying (failing?) to stage a coup.

The board was Altmans boss - this is pretty much their only job. Altman knew this and most likely ignored any questions or concerns of theirs thinking he is the unfireable superstar

Imagine if your boss fired you - and your response was - I’ll come back if you quit! Yeah, no. People might confuse status with those of actual ceo shareholders like zuck, bezos, or musk. But Altman is just another employee

The shareholders can fire the board, but that’s not what he’s asking for. And so far we haven’t heard anything about them getting fired. So mostly this just seems like an egomaniac employee who thinks he is the company (while appropriating the work of some really really smart data scientists)

◧◩
2. Workac+NB[view] [source] 2023-11-19 02:31:04
>>shmatt+by
I think the allure for Altman though would be that OpenAI already has all the pieces in place.

Going off and starting his own thing would be great, but it would be at least a year to get product out, even if he had all the same players making it. And that's just to catch up to current tech

◧◩◪
3. boring+lD[view] [source] 2023-11-19 02:39:41
>>Workac+NB
Thats ship has sailed for him if hes not on the openAI train out of town. He'd be like a third party political candidate if he tried another run at it building his own team+product from scratch. Lots of other great things to do for sure but probably not a similar supercharged role. It just wouldn't be the same - OpenAI clearly the front runner right now
◧◩◪◨
4. alumin+gE[view] [source] 2023-11-19 02:45:37
>>boring+lD
What if OAI's entire research organization follows him? Surely it's one of the best teams working today.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. sudosy+oI[view] [source] 2023-11-19 03:11:23
>>alumin+gE
Why would the entire org follow Sam instead of Ilya?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. comfys+AK[view] [source] 2023-11-19 03:29:20
>>sudosy+oI
Sounds like wishful thinking on the part of the authors source.

If I worked there, I would keep my job and see how things shake out. If I don’t like it, then I start looking. What I don’t do is risk my well being to take sides in a war between people way richer than me.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. jacque+uP[view] [source] 2023-11-19 04:00:19
>>comfys+AK
That makes good sense and I think all those that are not independently wealthy already except personal friends of either Sam or high level remainers are going to do something quite similar. It's just too fluid a situation to make good decisions, especially if your livelihood is at stake, better not to make decisions that can't be easily undone.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. sillys+jS[view] [source] 2023-11-19 04:23:29
>>jacque+uP
Given that the total comp package is $300k base + $600k profit share, I don’t think any of their livelihoods are at stake. >>36460082

You’re probably right because people usually don’t have an appetite for risk, but OpenAI is still a startup, and one does not join a startup without an appetite for risk. At least before ChatGPT made the company famous, which was recent.

I’d follow Sam and Greg. But N=1 outsider isn’t too persuasive.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. jacque+LV[view] [source] 2023-11-19 04:51:51
>>sillys+jS
> I’d follow Sam and Greg.

Once the avalanche has stopped moving that's a free decision, right now it could be costly.

[go to top]