zlacker

[return to "Three senior researchers have resigned from OpenAI"]
1. mirzap+0g[view] [source] 2023-11-18 09:29:34
>>convex+(OP)
This is escalating rather quickly. It is an incredibly irresponsible move by the OpenAI board. Hypergrowing company, and now they managed to shake up their user's trust in leadership stability. This has Adam's (D'Angelo) fingerprints all over it (for context, he did overthrow his co-founder, and Quora has been struggling ever since). This guy shouldn't sit on any board ever again.

I predict the board will be fired, and Sam and the team will return and try to contain the situation.

◧◩
2. concor+Jo[view] [source] 2023-11-18 10:41:46
>>mirzap+0g
Are you forgetting its a nonprofit? How could the board be fired? What does their charter say is the mechanism for removing a board member?
◧◩◪
3. mirzap+4s[view] [source] 2023-11-18 11:13:06
>>concor+Jo
Yeah, I misspoke earlier. Although nobody has actual power on paper, public and investor pressure can be just as influential.
◧◩◪◨
4. toomuc+tt[view] [source] 2023-11-18 11:23:13
>>mirzap+4s
Could Microsoft not hire Sam (reporting directly to Satya) and those who departed and equip them with compute access and ancillary resources? It seems less of a lift than salvaging the OpenAI situation internally due to the emotions and politics involved, non competes not existing in California (broadly speaking), and the logistics of attempting to apply pressure to a 501c3 board with very little leverage. The value is in the team, many who are now free agents.

Parting ways with OpenAI might be the only option if the org remains firm on the direction it has chosen. Build internally to reach capability parity and then accelerate ahead of them while slowly rolling out of the agreement with OpenAI, reallocating those previously committed resources internally.

“Due to the actions of OpenAI’s board, Microsoft had no choice but defend its investment in this revolutionary technology.” The pr wire writes itself.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. angora+AW[view] [source] 2023-11-18 14:30:29
>>toomuc+tt
> It seems less of a lift

I’ve seen this expression a lot recently and it baffles me.

The word you are looking for is “effort,” or if you prefer adjectives, maybe something like “difficult.”

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. collin+aU2[view] [source] 2023-11-19 01:58:16
>>angora+AW
Idioms exist and probably always will. I personally think they add a pleasant amount of variety and depth to communication, and sometimes even add deep nuance/context (even if I don't like every set of jargon or slang).

Even your "looking for" is a metaphor since you technically can't "look" for words (except as a metaphor for literally reading in a dictionary?) but we all know exactly what you mean. Moreover, if we trimmed language down to a minimal set and always used extremely precise meaning that might be an even worse experience than the "corporate speak" you're frustrated by.

Maybe you can redirect your anger to the part of corporate speak that I personally find annoying which is not the phrases per se but the propensity for using lots of words to say very little and to avoid directly taking responsibility for things. Let's put a pin in that one for now though and get something on the calendar to hash that out so we can get on the same page and circle back when we have a better bird's eye view on the action items and the right person to be decider :)

On the other hand you could take up loglan/lojban and maybe end up happier? Especially if it resulted in fewer meetings and managers.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. fuzzte+Yb6[view] [source] 2023-11-20 00:10:04
>>collin+aU2
yeah!

and also:

let's all jump on a call, set kras so we stay on the ball, up our team work to get that perk, get our messaging right, so the kpi chart goes up and to the right.

go team! play ball!

[go to top]