zlacker

I don’t understand why and how they didn’t consider this sort of discussion before so unceremoniously firing him. The others on the board outside Ilya need to go.

I don’t consider anybody beyond forgiveness and if Ilya takes a professional lesson from this and Sam learns to be more mindful of others’ concerns, I consider this a win for all. Starting over in a new entity sounds great but would be years of setback.

I hope they work this out.

>>dereg+(OP)
Yes, this attempt was a mess from the start. I don’t know which rumors to believe or care about, but the underlying story for me was that the board was acting like children with an $80b company that some believe to be strategically important to the US or maybe even mankind. If they had done this “properly” and their message was about irreconcilable differences between productization and research they could have made an actual go at this.

If they really believed in the non-profit mission, and Sam didn’t, they probably torpedoed their chances of winning.

This was all they had to write and today would be a different day:

> We regret to inform you that Sam Altman is being let go as CEO of OpenAI due to irreconcilable differences between his desire to commercialize our AI and OpenAI’s research-driven goals. We appreciate Sam’s contributions to the company and the partnership he established with Microsoft, which have set a foundation for OpenAI to thrive far into the future as a research organization with Microsoft focusing on commercialization of the technology.

> We want to assure you that ChatGPT and current features will remain and be upgraded into the future. However, the focus will be on developing core technologies and a reliable, safe, and trustworthy ecosystem for others to build on. We believe that this will allow us to continue to push the boundaries of AI research while also providing a platform for others to innovate and create.

>>dereg+(OP)
Why do you not think Ilya was the cheif architect of this failed coup? Im being serious everything ive seen points to him being the one responsible, there is no way he will ever stay let alone work in tech again

>>eighty+u1
Obviously because that wasn't what they actually cared about, this was a pure power play by incompetent idiots that shot themselves in the feet

>>kelsey+M7
You are absolutely delusional if you think the man who oversaw the development of GPT would not be able to continue working in tech even if he orchestrated a failed coup.

>>kelsey+c8
I mean, even if that wasn’t what it was about, that’s what a not-incompetent idiot would have said it was about. ChatGPT could have written that statement for them.

>>dereg+(OP)
> The others on the board outside Ilya need to go.

Does Ilya get a pass solely by his value to the company?

>>cthalu+V8
GPT is based on research Google published, it’s not like he’s the Einstein of AI. Shenanigans like this can absolutely derail your future regardless of how talented you may be.

>>dereg+(OP)
Having the CEO of Quora on the board also smells of a vested interest to hold the company/non-profit back.

>>speedy+Qa
There's not many Einsteins of anything besides Einstein himself. That doesn't change the fact that he is widely considered in the field to be a top expert and has shown that he can lead the development of a wildly successful product.

If this does end up being a failed coup, then it is of course detrimental to his career. But the statement I'm replying to was explicitly saying he would never work in tech again. Do you honestly believe there is any chance that Sutskever would be unable to work in this field somewhere else if he ultimately leaves OpenAI for whatever reason? I would bet $10,000 that he would have big name companies knocking on his door within days.

>>okdood+Ba
I think that his beliefs are important to the company. A board shouldn't be a homogenous glob nor should it be like a middle school friend group. What he did was both bizarre and amateur, but I believe in the best of us all the come forward from these types of events.

>>kelsey+M7
I do think he was the chief architect of the coup. I do think his beliefs and ideals are still valuable flora for a company of this ambition. There just needs to be a more professional structure for him to voice them.

Dealing with folks like Ilya isn't necessarily a matter of if, but how much.

>>cthalu+Lc
days? before he walks out the door. he must already have permanently open doors for him if he wants.

can he work on what he wants in those places? that is another story of course. but he knows the ins and outs of the lightning in a jar they captured and arguably that is the most promising asset on planet earth right now, so he'll be fine.

>>cthalu+Lc
Maybe not as extreme as never being able to find work again, but I doubt he’ll ever find himself in an important role where he’s able to lead and make consequential decisions. He basically clipped his own wings to put it metaphorically, if this is indeed a failed coup that was lead by him.

>>cphajd+pb
ya that’s a crazy conflict of interest. 8 years ago it may not have been so obvious though.

>>dereg+(OP)
Not seeing much set back here. There are plenty of free high-quality models to put to work from Day 1.

>>randyr+Og
He joined 5 years ago: https://twitter.com/sama/status/988859465863647234?lang=en

>>speedy+Qa
> GPT is based on research Google published

Why didnt Google create ChatGpt then, why did the fall behind?

>>speedy+Qa
Yet he managed to create versions of it that work better than what Google itself could make.

>>sumedh+7w
Everything's obvious once you know all the answers.

Google is publishing a lot of research and I guess many of them will be used by other companies.

Do you know now which research will be the basis of tomorrow's most spoken tech? No. They don't either.

>>jnwats+iQ
Well, he was hired away from Google in the first place.

>>speedy+Lf
Do you think if he starts a company no one will follow him?

>>Gigabl+zU
Years ago. And Google has been working actively on AI since that time, and even more actively since GPT-3.5 was released and they realized they need to catch up.

They are still catching up. What does this tell us?

>>Davidz+q21
Those on his team at OpenAI probably would yeah and anyone who shares views on AI safety. But the real question is will he able to raise capitol?

>>whynot+AQ
> Everything's obvious once you know all the answers.

No not really, Google has a history of not delivering or launching half baked products and then killing them quickly.

>>sumedh+Sb1
Read this sentence as "it's easy to say something is successful once it reached success".

>>whynot+gO1
Did you miss the history part?

Dont worry Google will launch a new version of a Chat App with AI to fix all their previous failures