I'm not an insider in this field....
But is Sam Altman really that critical? Or is it more a case that people follow where he leads (i.e. there are others equally technically competent).
But is Sam Altman really that critical? Or is it more a case that people follow where he leads (i.e. there are others equally technically competent).
Sam seems like the kind of guy you don't want to cross. Paul Graham says he's "extremely good at becoming powerful": https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/sam-altmans-ma...
I linked that New Yorker article from another thread, and dang said my comment was downweighted, but he wouldn't say how, just that it wasn't done by a mod: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38357062 (I know people don't like it when you complain about the moderation, but it seems topical in this case, since it gives insight into other machinations which could be happening)
Personality cult. Seeing hundreds of employees swearing fealty to their [ex]CEO has been very bizarre.
If anyone else was CEO of OpenAI and had been fired like this, the discussion would be almost the same.
He seems to be a guy who wants to be the next Zuckerberg. He wants fame and power, and would step on anyone and anything that gets in his way.
His agreessive commercialization of OpenAI gets in the way of the organization’s original mission. He believes he should get to tell the board what to do, not the other way around.
OpenAI would be better off with a more “tame” CEO who would just do what he/she can to make some dough without running afoul of the organization’s charter, accepting that his/her role and desires are secondary to organization’s.
Maybe, maybe not.
This has more to do with board than with Altman.
To many people, it seems that the board made an insane decision without reason. Whether that one decision is the doom of OpenAPI or not, the idea of having incompetent leadership (if true) is the doom of OpenAPI.
Not from any technical knowledge. Maybe his vision and business acumen, but mostly because at that level the tech-bro ceo founders stick together. Not in any formal conspiracy sense, just they have faith and trust and googly-eyes for each other.
From that perspective, the leaked sms messages from elon Musk prior to Twitter purchase were positively illuminating and will give you fascinating (if cringy) insight how billion dollar funding actually works.
Don't get me wrong - the cocky visionary overconfident charming mega star founder schtick clearly works. I'm not certain it should, but it does.