zlacker

Tons of high profile people spoke like this about Adam Neumann or Elizabeth Holmes too

>>herval+(OP)
Tons of high profile people spoke like that about a large number of individuals in the past. Here I think it's clear that OpenAI has indeed delivered something serious.

>>herval+(OP)
I'm starting to think what people say reflect their own thought about other people, and not facts we should accept depending on their net worth

>>herval+(OP)
Not everyone that you don't like is a fraudster. Just say that you don't like Sam, no need to make an obviously absurd comparison. The reason those were bad CEOs were that they swindled investors and lied about what their corporation is doing. I have absolutely no opinion on Sam Altman (didn't know about him before openai) btw, it's just that the comparison is completely nonsensical.

(It reminds me of comparing AI to crypto because both have hype behind them.)

>>herval+(OP)
Oh please, you're going to put Altman together with those clowns? He has a proven record of extreme accomplishment, in various domains, moreso than 99.9999% of people in the tech industry.

>>herval+(OP)
And Sam Bankman-Fried

>>mardif+34
I like that you have no opinion about this guy that got fired for “not [being] consistently candid in his communications with the board” other than it is plainly obvious that he isn’t a liar.

>>eigenv+66
This type of comment doesn't really help.

And for my two cents, he always seemed like a disingenuous hype salesman more than a technical person.

He's an Elon Musk or a Lex Friedman.

>>eigenv+66
>He has a proven record of extreme accomplishment, in various domains, moreso than 99.9999% of people in the tech industry.

I don't really see anything[1] that suggests that this sentence is true. Now, I'm not saying that he hasn't been successful, but there's "successful" and then there's your hyperbole.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Altman

>>eigenv+66
what did he do before open ai? (Which was founded by a lot more people than Sam). A genius in my opinion needs to have a track record of incredible things, key point being "track".

>>mardif+34
Why “obviously absurd”? They had spotless reputations, until they didn’t. So did the FTX guy, for instance. Just because you don’t understand, doesn’t mean something is nonsensical

>>jrflow+S8
No that's not my point. I'm not saying he's a liar or not, I'm saying that they are not similar regardless. He could be a liar without being a fraud. Openai is already not Theranos no matter what happens next.

>>mardif+34
> Not everyone that you don't like is a fraudster.

Sam Altman in particular has precedent, with Worldcoin, that should make you wary of defending him on that particular point.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/richardnieva/worldcoin-...

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoi...

>>strike+bg
> what did he do before open ai?

Worldcoin. Which is, to put it mildly, not positive.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoi...

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/richardnieva/worldcoin-...

>>mardif+Bs
This is a good point. There is no possible room for the general artificial intelligence company to disappoint investors or other stakeholders in a big way

>>mardif+34
They're not comparing them to those people, they're pointing out that (tech) celebrity endorsements don't mean much.

>>jrflow+S8
Well with the info currently available, that’s just like, the board’s opinion, man.

>>mardif+34
> Not everyone that you don't like is a fraudster

Maybe not. Perhaps it seems that everyone you do like is