zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. itsokt+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-11-20 15:38:34
>His "side-projects" could have been hugely beneficial to them over the long term.

How can you make a claim like this when, right or wrong, Sam's independence is literally, currently, tanking the company? How could allowing Sam to do what he wants benefit OpenAI, the non-profit entity?

replies(3): >>brooks+E7 >>bartre+jh >>golerg+aB
◧
2. brooks+E7[view] [source] 2023-11-20 16:22:51
>>itsokt+(OP)
> How could allowing Sam to do what he wants benefit OpenAI, the non-profit entity?

Let's take personalities out of it and see if it makes more sense:

How could a new supply of highly optimized, lower-cost AI hardware benefit OpenAI?

◧
3. bartre+jh[view] [source] 2023-11-20 17:06:24
>>itsokt+(OP)
> Sam's independence is literally, currently, tanking the company?

Honestly, I think they did that to themselves.

replies(1): >>hef198+mj
◧◩
4. hef198+mj[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-20 17:12:54
>>bartre+jh
And of course Sam is totally not involved in any of this, right?
replies(1): >>bartre+NM1
◧
5. golerg+aB[view] [source] 2023-11-20 18:12:32
>>itsokt+(OP)
> Sam's independence is literally, currently, tanking the company?

Before the boards' actions this friday, the company was on one of the most incredible success trajectories in the world. Whatever Sam's been doing as a CEO worked.

◧◩◪
6. bartre+NM1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-20 23:21:32
>>hef198+mj
In trashing the company's value? No, I'm not entirely sure it's fair to blame that one on him. I don't know the guy or have an opinion on him but, based on what I've seen since Friday, I don't think he's done that much to contribute to this particular mess. The company was literally on cloud nine this time last week and, if Friday hadn't happened, it still would be.
[go to top]