169 karma · joined March 5, 2023
I would argue the exact opposite. A website will be deployed to different versions of different browsers on different operating systems. A smart contract will exist on a single distributed computer. It sounds like the actual problem is people treating smart contract development as cavalierly as web app development
Specifically:
> Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities.
> it remains the fundamental governance responsibility of the board to advance OpenAI’s mission and preserve the principles of its Charter.
So the board did not have confidence that Sam was acting in good faith. Watch any of Ilya's many interviews, he speaks openly and candidly about his position. It is clear to me that Ilya is completely committed to the principles of the charter and sees a very real risk of sufficiently advanced AI causing disproportionate harm.
People keep trying to understand OpenAI as a hypergrowth SV startup, which it is explicitly not.
The original Verge article says (with no given sources): > missing a key 5PM PT deadline by which many OpenAI staffers were set to resign.
The tweet removes the qualifier: > The staff at OpenAI set a 5PM deadline for the entire board to resign, or else they quit and join Sam in his new company.
And you seem to parrot that point even though it is well past that deadline and no news of mass resignations
Honest question, do you have a source for that? Is it conceivable that Microsoft has some clause that grants them direct access to IP if OpenAI does not meet certain requirements. It is difficult to believe that Microsoft handed over $10B without any safeguards in place. Surely they did their due diligence on OpenAI's corporate structure.
OpenAI has never claimed they want Sam back. The article claims OpenAI's investors want him back.
I will agree that OpenAI could have done a better job of letting him go if there truly were irreconcilable differences.
The thing that had the biggest effect for me is eliminating caffeine. It has a pretty long half life and I believe I metabolize it slower than the average person. Most sources say it is ok to consume it in the morning, but in my case even morning consumption was enough to significantly disrupt my sleep. When I got to the point that even a can of coke was stimulating, I observed a complete cessation of night time restlessness.
The other thing that helped reliably, although to a lesser degree, was getting ~15 minutes of natural sunlight in the morning. In terms of supplements, a combination of lemon balm (mildly increases gaba) and agmatine sulfate (mild nmda antagonism) occasionally helps. I try to use supplements as a last resort, as I try to fix the issues upstream.
I think this speaks to the complexity of our bodies, something you do in the morning can have a significant effect in how you feel at night. It is also wild how our culture normalizes things that go against the healthy functioning of our bodies. I know many people who only get sunlight walking to their car. The human body is amazingly complex, there is certainly much more for us to understand.
Great suggestion! I had a role where I helped a small team develop a full stack, data-heavy application. I felt pretty good about the individual layers but I felt we could have done a better job at achieving cohesion in the big picture. Do you have any resources where people think about these sorts of things deeply?
I try to remind myself of this fact when I'm frustrated with other people. A bit of humility and gratitude go a long way.
> “We use the terms one-way door and two-way door to describe the risk of a decision at Amazon. Two-way door decisions have a low cost of failure and are easy to undo, while one-way door decisions have a high cost of failure and are hard to undo. We make two-way door decisions quickly, knowing that speed of execution is key, but we make one-way door decisions slowly and far more deliberately.”
Anti-design is effective in making things memorable and engaging. When I attended Davis, I first thought the Social Sciences Building[2] was a bit of an eye sore. It was intentionally designed to be challenging. Now it is one of my most vivid memories of the campus.
1: https://99designs.com/blog/design-history-movements/anti-des...
2: https://localwiki.org/davis/Social_Sciences_and_Humanities_B...
I do agree that clarity or efficiency are not necessarily the highest values to strive for.