zlacker

>>staran+(OP)
The media and the VCs are treating Sam like some hero and savior of AI. I’m not getting it. What has he done in life and/or AI to deserve so much respect and admiration? Why don’t top researchers and scientists get equivalent (if not more) respect, admiration and support? It looks like one should strive to become product manager, not an engineer or a scientist.

>>eclect+79
He says nice things about his team (and even about his critics) when in public.

But my reading of this drama is that the board were seen as literally insane, not that Altman was seen as spectacularly heroic or an underdog.

>>ben_w+Km
My reading of all this is that the board is both incompetent and has a number of massive conflicts of interests.

What I don’t understand is why they were allowed to stay on the board with all these conflicts of interests all the while having no (financial) stake in OpenAI. One of the board members even openly admitting that she considered destroying OpenAI a successful outcome of her duty as board member.

>>stingr+Rp
It's probably not easy (practically impossible if you ask me) to find people who are both capable of leading an AI company at the scale of OpenAI and have zero conflicts of interest. Former colleagues, friends, investments, advisory roles, personal beefs with people in the industry, pitches they have heard, insider knowledge they had access to, previous academic research pushing an agenda, etc.

If both is not possible, I'd also rather compromise on the "conficts of interest" part than on the member's competency.