[BryantD]

This is too incomplete to reach any conclusions. The board made claims about a specific class of activity. They may or may not have been more specific in their conversations with Sam and Greg. Either way the credibility accusation needs more than just a timeline to refute it.

Maybe it was a coup as per some reporting; maybe it wasn’t. I’m reluctant to make a decision here based on who got to the reporters first. There is some asymmetry in media savvy between Sam and the board.

[trogdor]

I’m with you on this. OpenAI’s board publicly stated that Sam Altman had lied to them, and that they no longer have confidence in his ability to continue leading the company. I find it really hard to believe they just made that up. They could have just said that they lost confidence in Sam’s leadership. But they also said he had lied to them. And that’s a big deal.

This just happened. We don’t have all the facts.

[BryantD]

Yes. It’s also true that the board made decisions I would not expect from a competent board, like not giving any investors a heads up about this.

One thing we’ll know by tomorrow morning: was Swisher right when she said there’d be more top level resignations? That will tell us a certain amount about her credibility/sources.

(Also, obviously, my opinion about any of this is worth what you pay for it.)

[trogdor]

Apparently, an internal memo at OpenAI states that Sam was not fired for malfeasance.

Unbelievable.

See https://www.axios.com/2023/11/18/openai-memo-altman-firing-m...