zlacker

For whatever it's worth (not much), Sam Altman did say they would do that

> if any former employee who signed one of those old agreements is worried about it, they can contact me and we'll fix that too. very sorry about this.

https://x.com/sama/status/1791936857594581428

>>madeof+(OP)
Given what OpenAI's been in the press for the past few weeks, I can't help but feel this is a trap; even if it isn't, Sam is certainly making it look like it is...

>>madeof+(OP)
What Sam is saying is very different than what I'm saying. I'm saying he should be proactive and just do it, he's saying that if people explicitly reach out to him then he'll do it specifically for them.

>>madeof+(OP)
Sure and anyone who has worked in a toxic workplace knows exactly what it means to require a direct path to leadership to resolve an issue instead of just resolving it.

>>tedivm+f1
Turkeys don't vote for an early Christmas.

>>pempem+55
I also notice he conditions it on "any former employee." What about current employees who may be affected by the same legalese?

Either way, I can imagine a subtext of "step forward and get a target on your back."

>>madeof+(OP)
This looks like proper accountability and righting your wrongs to me. Much respect to Sam. I hope this isn’t just a performance for the public.

>>madeof+(OP)
don't go public

don't contact OpenAI legal, which leaves an unsavory paper trail

contact me directly, so we can talk privately on the phone and I can give you a little $$$ to shut you up

>>Terr_+p8
Current employees rarely sign exit agreements, since by exiting they stop being employees.

>>tedivm+Vw
True, they can't renegotiate agreements that don't yet exist.

However the fact that the corporate leadership could even make those threats to not-yet-departed employees indicates that something is already broken or missing in the legal relationship with current ones.

A simple example might for the company to clearly state in their handbook--for all current employees--that vested shares cannot be clawed back.

>>jay-ba+F8
Hope is not a process. Look at what he does not what he says. Actually you should go deaf whenever you see him opening his mouth.

>>tedivm+f1
Importantly if he just said publicly that that he wouldn't enforce the non-disparagement agreements that could be legally binding[1]. But if he just says he'll release people who he's, legally speaking, free to just not do that.

[1] The keywords are promissory estoppel. I'm not a lawyer but this looks at least like a borderline case worth worrying about.

>>super2+w5
Bingo.

>>jay-ba+F8
Some people are just so deep into fanboiism they refuse to see the writing on the wall even when it's in ten-foot-high letters of fire on a pitch-black background. Of fucking course it's just a performance for the public.