zlacker

>>medler+(OP)
The board seems truly incompetent here and looking at the member list it doesn't seem very surprising. A competent board should have asked for legal and professional advice before taking a drastic step like this. Instead the board thought it was a boxing match and tried to deliver a knockout punch before the market closes with blunt language. This might be the most incompetent board for an organisation of this size.

>>crop_r+w3
The major investors whose money is on the line and who are funding the venture, Microsoft, Sequoia, and Khosla, were not given advanced warning or any input in to how this would impact their investment.

I would definitely say the board screwed up.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkonrad/2023/11/17/openai-in...

>>silenc+kz
The board of the non-profit (one that fired Sam) has no fiduciary duty to those investors, I believe. Microsoft invested in the for-profit Openai, which is owned by the non-profit. The other ones I don't know.

The board has no responsibility to Microsoft whatsoever regarding this. Sam Altman structured it this way himself. Not to say that the board didn't screw up.

>>MVisse+jK
You can do everything by the rules, and still do the wrong thing

>>mdekke+w01
Wrong by what metric? What if they believe the only way to fulfill their duty to the charter is for open ai to die? Why would it be wrong? Is it worse that it living to be the antithesis of itself? Just so the investors can have a little more honey?