zlacker

The contrast between the media's depiction of today's events with this outcome demonstrates how much Sam and his aligned interests can influence a narrative. The vast majority of reporting indicated that Sam held all the leverage, the board members were about to be fired, and a new board would be appointed which would be much better aligned with Sam. These accounts took special care to portray the current board as inept, wavering, and eager to backtrack. However, the reality appears to be that the board was steadfast in their decision and focused on moving forward in search of a new CEO. The truth is, we still don't know the real reason why Sam was ousted. His removal may be justified and it may not. But in the absence of information, media speculation was overwhelmingly biased in Sam's interests. If the news that the board did not immediately backtrack and capitulate to Sam's demands seems to be coming out of left field, you've likely fallen victim to this narrative. Chances are the board is not as incompetent as you were led to believe, and any judgement of their competence should be reserved until further details are provided on the reasons for Sam's removal.

>>ansk+(OP)
There is one thing that sticks out:

Why didn't the board explain itself clearly?

There are times when saying anything publicly would be considered defamation and openining themselves to lawsuits, but it seems that they owe it to their own staff in plain words. They didn't explain the situation properly as per leaked internal announcements.

>>ansk+(OP)
How much controlling this influence of a narrative impacts for decision to resign for workers as a protest in OpenAI? I hope that not too much…

>>ansk+(OP)
Yes, the media and the general conversation seems very one sided; and I do not see any basis to take a side. Sam being an overachiever, might actually be acting with maleficence and deceit. Why is no-one even considering that?

Everyone is just reiterating that board is inept and trying to undermine them. This does not sit right with me.

>>ansk+(OP)
If this were true they never would have had talks to bring him back. That's the opposite of steadfast commitment to principles. If Sam wronged them or the company in a significant way they never should have let him back in the building.

The board's decisions may or may not turn out to be correct in hindsight. But it's very difficult to say that this was a good example of leadership or decision making.

>>ansk+(OP)
The board demonstrated their incompetency in how they fired Sam without communicating this decision to their biggest stakeholder, Microsoft, or with any clear transition plan in place.

>>hooand+72
That is just current narrative, we don't know the details right? There was immense pressure from investors/Microsoft and board had to have that meeting. But the board probably already made their mind and did not balk under pressure.

>>hooand+72
That depends on what "talks" consisted of. If it was Altman throwing arguments at them, and them just replying "no thank you", I don't see a problem.

>>adastr+k2
The board governs a mission-driven nonprofit, not a profit-focused enterprise where Microsoft has board-level influence as investor. This tension (operating as if it is a startup when it is not) is why Altman was fired.

>>system+21
Maybe for a company of 12-50 there would be more candid discussion internally, but over 100 and especially at OpenAI size (and with Microsoft involved) liability control is at the max. Moreover, if the Board thought the decision would help improve retention, then they would comment, but that's clearly not the case.

OpenAI is not a typical LLC or S/C-corp though, so the Board also has to overcome that conceptual hurdle.

>>hooand+72
If I had to guess, they had the talks to bring him back as a favor to somebody, or as a sign of good faith, but neither party had changed their position so there was no compromise to be had.

>>hooand+72
https://twitter.com/ashleevance/status/1726469283734274338

> So, here's what happened at OpenAI tonight. Mira planned to hire Sam and Greg back. She turned Team Sam over past couple of days. Idea was to force board to fire everyone, which they figured the board would not do. Board went into total silence. Found their own CEO Emmett Shear

Written by the person who broke the story at Bloomberg.

So it appears a single person on the board wanted the talks to bring him back, and nobody else. I think that's 1 against 3, but the point is that the board wasn't totally united (which is not surprising).

>>ansk+(OP)
The fact that this outcome occurred proves the board's resolve & determination (stubbornness?) but not much else.

some important questions: - if Ilya had 4:2, why not just sit Sam down and work all this out in private? - why has the board been completely unable to explain themselves to OAI employees? to the public? - why not take a more neutral "parting ways" tone? - latest reporting suggests that the board is doing this without any outside council (legal or professional network). it seems absolutely bonkers to risk funding sources eg MSFT on a decision like this.

>>ansk+(OP)
I'm still surprised how little attention there has been on the fact that Sam Altman's sister is accusing him of sexually assaulting her when she was younger.

His own sister, even if it's not true, it reflects poorly to have this kind of relationship with your sister that she'd say this, and if it's true, it's very problematic.

And for some reason, very very little mention of this. I just find it suspicious from a media behavior point of view.

>>system+21
I think it's possible that Sam had some secret plans involving deals with external companies, that the board learned about. They can't reveal that information without potentially damaging other businesses and becoming liable.

>>dundar+v3
Mira isn't on the OpenAI Board.

>>didibu+O3
Where has this been reported?

>>emoden+Q4
She tweeted it herself:

https://twitter.com/phuckfilosophy/status/145969637613300121...

https://twitter.com/phuckfilosophy/status/163570439893983232...

>>ignora+N4
I genuinely don't remember who's on it, so thanks for the data point. Regardless, my argument is they needn't act in total unanimity.

I presume this Mira person wasn't totally freelancing -- how would this even end up being presented to the board without some direction from someone on the board. So maybe more like 3.5 against 0.5. It could have been a total flip flop, but that's a bigger assumption. I have no problem not assuming grand narratives until the basic reporting shakes out.

>>dundar+v3
She was the interim CEO not a board member? Considering was supposedly happened appointing her was the smartest thing to do (from the perspective of the board)

>>didibu+O3
No, this is the proper way to handle accusations from someone who may not be credible. You investigate privately, and only report after, if the accusations seem credible. You don't blast across the media that so-and-so is accused of sexual assault, because then the damage is done, regardless of the truth. Signal boost it enough, and every lay-person's main association with the person will become, "oh, that guy accused of sexually assaulting his sister".

The accusations are about events 25 years ago, when they were children. No one will ever be able to disprove this, so there's no way to undo the reputational damage.

>>system+21
I question if any board in history has explained itself with clarity and honesty. By my cynical lens they would never stoop to engage in virtues other than signalling.

>>ah765+f4
While Sam tried to make the impression that he doesn't know why he was fired, he didn't even try to deny the allegations that he was in talks with the Saudis to create a for profit AI hardware company.

I think you are right that Ilya didn't want to give out secret information to not open up himself to lawsuits.

>>dundar+B6
> I presume this Mira person wasn't totally freelancing

She was the interim CEO; it seems that it was her and some of the rest of the executive team, not the board, that wanted Sam to come back. The board apparently was working on finding a new interim CEO to replace Mira that wasn't in Sam's camp more than it was trying to bring Sam back.

>>b0tch7+L3
Human character doesn't change that much, let's say that in his heart Sam is more of of a move fast and commercialize type of leader and Ilya doesn't want that. Do you think them sitting down and talking about it is really going to change things that much? People are who they are. If anything they've probably had these exact conversations many times already. Not every relationship is fixable, sometimes people are just incompatible.

As for the board's silence to the public, this should be obvious. Talking about their thinking/plans/reasons for firing Sam exposes them to all kinds of risk both legally and otherwise. The safe move is to stay quiet in public and continue talks with the relevant stakeholders (Microsoft, Sam + loyalists) in private

>>didibu+O3
> even if it's not true, it reflects poorly to have this kind of relationship with your sister that she'd say this

People making false accusations against you reflects poorly on _you_ now? What a world to live in.

>>swalli+03
Stakeholder is not a by-word for shareholder. Microsoft has a very large stake in the outcome of OpenAI’s decisions, even if they aren’t a “shareholder” (if that were a thing) of the OpenAI non-profit.