zlacker

>>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)

>>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

>>Workac+NB
Except building something the second time around is often quicker and with the current gains of hardware capabilities and interest in the space… maybe it wouldn’t be a year behind.

>>j45+5C
There are also a ton of ~first mover advantages you can't benefit from, be they of untapped markets for demand or the exploitation of underpriced labor, capital, or IP. If Sam started a new company he would not get as good a deal on hardware or labor, he would get much more scrutiny on his training sets, and he would have to compete against both OpenAI and its competitors.

>>plorg+SK
For sure. Getting ahead and staying ahead is one of them.

I’m just not sure it would be totally starting from scratch since there is more of a playbook and know how.