zlacker

Hanlon's razor[0] applies. There is no reason to assume malice, nor shamelessness, nor anything negative about Ilya. As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Consider:

Ilya sees two options; A) OpenAI with Sam's vision, which is increasingly detached from the goals stated in the OpenAI charter, or B) OpenAI without Sam, which would return to the goals of the charter. He chooses option B, and takes action to bring this about.

He gets his way. The Board drops Sam. Contrary to Ilya's expectations, OpenAI employees revolt. He realizes that his ideal end-state (OpenAI as it was, sans Sam) is apparently not a real option. At this point, the real options are A) OpenAI with Sam (i.e. the status quo ante), or B) a gutted OpenAI with greatly diminished leadership, IC talent, and reputation. He chooses option A.

[0]Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

>>marcus+(OP)
Hanlon's razor is enormously over-applied. You're supposed to apply Hanlon's razor to the person processing your info while you're in line at the DMV. You're not supposed to apply Hanlon's razor to anyone who has any real modicum of power, because, at scale, incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

>>kibwen+za
The difference between the two is that incompetence is often fixable through education/information while malice is not. That is why it is best to first assume incompetence.