Yeah. I'm of two minds about the whole thing. The people opposed to Altman were not some random nobodies; OpenAI's governance structure was set up in a very specific way to keep safety at the forefront, and it's steadily becoming more and more commercially minded now, which is going to impact safety. A big bunch of highly, highly qualified people who raised the alarm about something bad going on in the governance isn't something to take lightly. The fact that he outmaneuvered them doesn't mean he was right.
On the other hand, it really sounds like his opponents refused to explain themselves on any level when given multiple opportunities, so it makes it hard to evaluate whatever problem or potential problem they saw. IDK.
On the other hand, it really sounds like his opponents refused to explain themselves on any level when given multiple opportunities, so it makes it hard to evaluate whatever problem or potential problem they saw.
And now, thanks to Altman's new rule, we'll never know! I hate to say it, but that stinks to high heaven and gives me a lot more faith there's internal documents that support the boards decision. The fact is, Altman et al have made a choice to never let us know. Why would that be important to hide if he's a good guy and the board had no real justifications? Wouldn't it benefit them to show the board was full of shit? So hiding it is a bad fucking look.
Don't forget they recently took off the rules that said you couldn't use this for weapons. Altman is scum, I'm very convinced.
Did everyone just forget that Altman was the cryptobro behind worldcoin, ie that thing that got banned in every poor African country it launched in because of ethics and general damage to the public? Like, we knew he was a shitty person since long before openai was a household name.
Also, we do have a pretty good idea of what Altman did that worried the board of directors, namely when trying to get someone he didn’t like removed he met with every board member one on one and then lied to them by saying that everyone else was already on board with his plan and agreed with him. The board members compared notes, realized that he lied to their face, and fired him for said lieing. Given his reputation I don’t see how that should have been new info, but I guess they thought he would be honest with them, if not the public.
Ya, I only watch the train wreck out of curiosity, but if you we’re wondering why so many people who were pushing NFTs suddenly pivoted to a tect genorator, it was just a case of following the more successful grifter as he moved from marketing one hype based product to another. But hey, at least a subscription service to a program that predicts the next most likely word in the sentence after being fed the entire internet is nominally more concrete than skimming a lot of the top of selling vast sets of poor people’s biometrics to security agencies.
What is your source for the story about Altman being duplicitous with the board in that specific way? I tried at length to look for news about what exactly he had done back when this was happening, and I couldn't find it.
Honestly, I thought it was from a specific source when I made that comment but I just checked that source and it wasn’t mentioned there so I guess I don’t actually know where I heard it. I do remember that it came out in a comment by one of the board members as to what had happened a while after the dust settled.
Yeah, that's super interesting. It lines up with what I do remember them saying to the press is part of why it made sense to me. If you do run across something please send it to me; I'm interested.
