zlacker

>>medler+(OP)
Man, the board already looked reckless and incompetent, but this solidifies the appearance. You can do crazy ill-advised things, but if you unwaveringly commit, we’ll always wonder if you’re secretly a genius. But when you immediately backtrack, we’ll know you were a fool all along.

>>skygaz+R1
They are already the dumbest board in history (even dumber than Apple’s board firing Steve Jobs). So it’s not out of keeping with anything. Besides, those 2 independent board members (who couldn’t do fizz-buzz if their lives depended on it) won’t be staying long if Sam returns— nor are they likely to ever serve on any board ever again after their shenanigans.

>>eigenv+Qa
Some of the board member choices are baffling. Like why is Joseph Gordon Levitt’s wife on the board? Her startup has under 10 employees and has a personal email address as the contact address on the homepage.

>>spacem+ke
I guess you missed the part about Amal Clooney‘s husband at the Golden Globes. It’s 2023, why are we still referring people like that?

>>ivan_g+kh
It was funny because with the Clooneys both of them have actually accomplished things in significant situations and it was clearly wrong.

In this case this person seems to have primarily tried and failed to spin a robotics company out of Singularity “university” in 2012.

This only sounds adjacent to AI if you work in Hollywood.

>>svnt+Wo
It was wrong not because they both did achieve something. It is generally wrong and the joke just used their achievements to break the barrier for understanding that.

>>ivan_g+kA1
Suggesting that we should be on a first name basis with the romantic partner of every famous person we know of simply because they are the romantic partner of a famous person is pretty naive. “Spouse of Y” works just fine generally to save space and effort for (locally) real people.