zlacker

Why can't openai just be a competent drama-free org?

Is it impossible to build really cool tech without the upheaval?

>>willsm+(OP)
Probably because if you collect a bunch of highly motivated and extremely smart people who are good at overcoming obstacles and eliminating problems they eventually start to see each other as obstacles or problems.

>>willsm+(OP)
> Why can't openai just be a competent drama-free org?

Because it is run by humans, for the time being.

>>willsm+(OP)
This sort of thing happens even in FOSS projects all of the time, you can’t have people without drama. And perhaps you won’t have AI without drama, either.

>>willsm+(OP)
because these are 2 people who are at the top of the field and can work on literally anything they want.

>>willsm+(OP)
You can't remove politics (human beings interacting) from human beings interactions.

>>willsm+(OP)
Where are you seeing the drama? Two people have left a startup, that’s all. It happens all the time.

>>CSMast+K1
Having been on founding teams that imploded like open AI and ones that succeeded I've found that waving a big wad of cash before every meeting does wonders to motivate people.

>This is what we all want, and we want it as fast as possible. Let's get through this together and enjoy our tropical islands alone.

You can trust people's greed, you can't trust their morals. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't seen a large enough wad of cash yet.

>>Apocry+O2
Foss projects are drama. I've found it much worse in the non-profit space than the for profit space. Which openai showed us ironically.

>>llm_tr+Sa
This is a bit confusing in the context of OpenAI drama. The employees at OpenAI have never really lacked monetary incentives. It seems that you... can't trust people's greed when they have ulterior motives like "safe AGI".

>>JimDab+58
If you think those are the only points of drama, you may not have seen news about OpenAI from a couple months ago where Sam got ousted from the board, got in bed with Microsoft, then eventually came back to OpenAI, just to name one of the bigger dramas off the top of my head. It's definitely more than just the two data points from yesterday that you mentioned.

>>baobab+Di
Open AI was founded on morals. It was a not for profit there for the benefit of humanity. Then M$ came around with a lot of cash and we got the soap opera we're seeing here.

>>llm_tr+Em
Right. But everybody didn't play along nicely, did they? Even though MS flaunted wads of cash in front of their faces. So we can't really trust everybody to choose greed over morals or whatnot.

>>makk+l2
That's funny.

If OpenAI's tech is so great, why aren't they using it to direct the company yet?

>>willsm+(OP)
Less powerful inventions have caused more drama than this, historically speaking.

>>willsm+(OP)
You have limited resources on both computations and engineering. And everyone have different, conflicting priorities. The group needs to make a decision where to put their resources, so there is politic.

>>llm_tr+Sa
> You can trust people's greed, you can't trust their morals.

I've lived this experience. It's a time old tale. Judas Iscariot sold out his best friend for a few silver pieces.

However, I've learned I can trust someone's morals so long as it comes from outside themselves. In small ways, that outside is society, school, company or circumstance. But I think the big one is more important, i.e., Jeremiah 17:9-10

>>llm_tr+Sa
You can trust greed to produce something. You can also trust that something to be utterly worthless, at best.

>>willsm+(OP)
It started as a non-profit, which is the root of all the issues.

It needs to find a way to get over that non-profit. otherwise, I don't think the company will survive longer term.

The incentives are not super-aligned (pun intended). Employees want to build AI and make a lot of money at the same time, meanwhile the board (who wouldn't earn any money anyway) is willing to destroy money to further AI.

If OpenAI was a normal for-profit company, Sam and co-founders would have been billionaires already. Now Sam seems to have other several stakes and side projects...

>>gaudys+al
> If you think those are the only points of drama

I’m not saying they are the only points of drama. I’m saying they aren’t points of drama.

Sure, I saw the drama that happened a couple of months ago. But I’m replying to a comment on these departures, which seem drama-free.