Irving on Helen, Ilya, and Sam(twitter.com) |
Irving on Helen, Ilya, and Sam(twitter.com) |
When i look at the various comments across the various posts on this topic i am ashamed of the people in the Tech. Industry. There is just unbridled greed where it seems folks would sell their own mother for money. While i am no better than most of my fellow humans when it comes to love of money, i hope i have some moral/ethical compass which will allow me to make better decisions when it comes to societal altering technologies. Ilya and his team stood for something and we need to encourage such moral/ethical stands in the industry.
Sam Altman is just a business schmoozer and hustler who seems to have only gotten to where he is due to patronage by other well-established folks and not due to any inherent technical vision/mastery/knowledge. He is replaceable but the brains behind the technology is not.
He will not even say the real reason that he, not the Board, fired Sam. If he has lost trust in Sam, he can no longer say so.
I also do not see why the board would endanger their already weak position by giving any courtesy notice to Microsoft, who has the best lawyers in the world and will move instantly.
But all said and done, people need to get behind Ilya and the Technical Team at OpenAI. They deserve it.
Anybody else who knows Sam well want to Chime in? All this hero worship is coming from people who don't know Sam and don't know why he's fired.
This twitter post is literally better information then anything I've seen for the past weekend.
It is a datapoint. It's not the only datapoint.
That said, it feels awkward to even point out these gradations, without knowing the people in question.
I just realized that this is the kind of conversation that preceded forum witch hunts. Or tribe formation :/
My take: this is a counterpoint to a point that is not very relevant. Yes, the ad hominen attacks are despicable, but it should be a debate of their actions, not people's values and character. It's undeniable that the 4 board members didn't demonstrate competence to handle this situation, and very likely didn't fulfill their duty towards the interests of OpenAI's mission (neither the for-profit or the non-profit one). They don't have anyone but themselves to blame for this s*show.
Some red flags: "she took the board role with reservations because she felt it was important someone like her was on it" (climber way of talking) ".. Despite the thoughtfulness of those involved..." (cliche way of describing people, also climber adjacent)