How OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Was Fired by Rival Board Members | Hacker News Reader

How OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Was Fired by Rival Board Members

sfstandard.com

60 pointssourabh03agr28 comments

I think it shows the dangers of natural intelligence (NI), which occurs in some humans. And raises an ethical question, could NI be an existential threat to humanity? I am afraid so, and I think we need our governments to step in and regulate NI. For example, we should consider limiting which companies can have intelligent employees. We need to make sure that natural intelligence is only ever used by responsible people.

I have here in my hand a long list of real world outcomes of these natural intelligences, and I assure you the risks cannot be understated. Never before has such cruelty, evil, or destruction been wrecked upon the innocent, and I assure you! IT IS HAPPENING NOW! There are some, perhaps, who will direct you to distraction; they will point you to every flickering flame of fear with which you may be led astray: be not misled. Natural intelligences must be restricted by every tool imaginable: they are capable of severe threats to social stability, national security, and economic wellbeing. I urge you, the reader, to act monetarily now to prevent them from reaching general intelligence!

uno reverse..

drmogoguery is probably a bigger threat here.

NI is hundreds of thousands of years old and pathological cases, if not solved, are at least known quantities.

Those that don't know all the pathological cases are doomed to repeat them.

Without Altman, will Microsoft have invested $10 billion+ in OpenAI?

Sure, he might not be the brains, but will Microsoft have really bet $10b+ on Murati, Ilya, and two nonprofit board hoggers?

Ok let’s be real - there are a lot of smart people at OpenAI - but will they stay?

There's a lot of smart people at a lot of companies.

Most of those companies have much, much deeper pockets than OpenAI ever has had, and now probably ever will.

I see no reason Microsoft and the likes don't see the writing on the wall here and decide to have a go at it on their own, or pick up the talent that's abandoning ship.

OpenAI now being entirely run by "idea" people and purists will be a big hurt on their fund raising abilities... which from their own operational numbers seems an obvious necessity.

There are even more of these smart researchers and engineers at google. Difference is openai had a business genius who could execute on product while the behemoth with infinite pockets never had.

people still work for Elon musk

Also, going forward, will talent be drawn to OpenAI?

If I were be being aggressively courted for a position there, I would pause long and hard and wonder if the deep divisions this incident exposed and the inept way the firing was handled were emblematic of fundamental problems at the company.

Before yesterday, OpenAI was probably the most desirable and glamorous workplace in the world. Now, it hearkens back to post-Jobs Apple: ostensibly intact, but spiritually hollowed-out.

A lot of people are missing the key point: the CEO doesn't own the company. The Board does, and the CEO and other officers are hired by the Board to run the company on their behalf and on investors'.

Based on the insider details leaking on Twitter and Reddit this is a case of a narcissistic CEO more preoccupied with becoming a household name like Elon Musk than with doing the job for which they were hired.

If what's rumored is true then his firing was absolutely justified.

Try running your own agenda against the express wishes of your direct superior(s) at just about any company, and see how well that goes.

Do non-profit boards have this same dynamic?

They do in Canada. Can't speak for the US but I don't see why it would be different. It's called the Board of Directors for a reason.

> Based on the insider details leaking on Twitter and Reddit

Source?

I've since lost the contents of my clipboard but search r/openai

Some members really raise questions. What are the qualifications of Helen Toner for such a role? How did she get the seat?

"An AI researcher at Oxford" sounds pretty qualified!

For a board seat at a major company? That’s rather untypical. She wasn’t exactly a famous researcher in her field either when appointed.

You’re right - the board construction is remarkably bad. Seems like it was a classic case of centralizing power by stuffing the board with relative nobodies.

newsflash, most of society works exactly like this.

er...have you looked at the boards of most startups?

it's VCes and mates, not highly qualified people in implementing that particular product area.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com