zlacker

>>staran+(OP)

    > We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam Altman to return to OpenAI as CEO with a new initial board of Bret Taylor (Chair), Larry Summers, and Adam D'Angelo.

    > We are collaborating to figure out the details. Thank you so much for your patience through this.

1- So what was the point of this whole drama, and why couldn't you have settled like this adults?

2- Now what happens to Microsoft's role in all of this?

3- Twitter is still the best place to follow this and get updates, everyone is still make "official" statements on twitter, not sure how long this website will last but until then, this is the only portal for me to get news.

>>ryzvon+71
> So what was the point of this whole drama, and why couldn't you have settled like this adults?

Altman was trying to remove one of the board members before he was forced out. Looks like he got his way in the end, but I'm going to call Altman the primary instigator because of that.

His side was also the "we'll nuke the company unless you resign" side.

>>6gvONx+Z2
His side was also "700 regular employees support this", which is pretty unusual as most people don't care about their CEO at all. I am not related to OpenAI at all, but given the choice of "favorite of all employees" vs "fire people with no warning then refuse to give explanation why even under pressure" I know which side I root for.

>>theamk+A5
Looking back, Altman's ace in hand was the tender offer from Thrive. Idk anyone at OpenAI, but all the early senior personnel backed him with vehemence. If the leaders hand't championed him strongly, I doubt you get 90% of the company to commit to leaving.

I'm sure some of those employees were easily going to make $10m+ in the sale. That's a pretty great motivation tool.

Overall, I do agree with you. The board could not justify their capricious decision making and refused to elaborate. They should've brought him back on Sunday instead of mucking around. OpenAI existing is a good thing.