[shrimpx]

Sam Altman is a typical fast-growth guy and this is the opportunity of a lifetime to cement himself in the pantheon of high growth tech gods — Jobs, Zuckerberg, Bezos, Musk, Hoffman, etc.

But aw shucks it’s a terrible fit actually, because this company has a non-profit, idealistic mission. In the face of unprecedented high demand, Sam Altman is like fuck the nonprofit hippie shit, let’s launch this thing into outer space. Let’s build fast and ship too many products too early, use investor money to give discounts and build moats, let’s go for regulatory capture! It’s the opportunity of a lifetime guys!

But the board is like nah, fuck that tiring ‘ship broken shit’ tech bro shit, let’s stick to our vision. This is too serious and important to treat it like a fucking Airbnb or Coinbase.

[jacquesm]

This may well be the case, and the one that I would hope is underlying all of this. But until the board clearly states this it is also speculative.

[fourside]

> But until the board clearly states this it is also speculative.

Even if this is the case, and Jeremy Howard’s Twitter thread on this would lend credence to this version, OpenAI butchered the execution. If firing Altman really is about not letting profit ruin a very important advancement in technology, the board would have the moral upper hand. And yet, their communication has been so poor that right now, they’re not exactly winning the PR battle.

If you’re gonna stage a coup for such a high profile company, you better know what you’re doing. So far, it’s been looking like amateur hour.

[jacquesm]

Agreed on all points.

[CPLX]

This is the most on point comment I’ve seen in the dozen threads on this topic.

I think the reason so many people on HN can’t come to this obvious conclusion is they share the same sociopathic Silicon Valley worldview he does.

[jaybrendansmith]

There's a vast ocean of difference between 'growth at all costs' and 'good corporate governance'. OpenAI is bleeding cash. Sama knows that you need to bring money in to build important new technology, especially in this non-frothy high interest rate economy. So while it's not critical to make a profit, you need to keep the lights on to keep the new research and development going. What Ilya and the board have done is completely wrecked OpenAI's momentum at a critical time. Unless they are sitting on world-changing AGI, this move made no sense and they don't have the company's best interests at heart.

[solardev]

It could also be cynicism and not naivete? It'd be pretty amazing if OpenAI actually wrested away control for the betterment of humanity. That'd be the good news of the decade... just hard to imagine in this world.

[skygazer]

That’s a broad, uncharitable brush with which to paint everyone else. Maybe we need a razor: hesitate to attribute to sociopathy that which can reasonably be explained by a benign difference of opinion.

[solardev]

In two decades of tech booms, when have we seen a huge company actually do what's good for society? Our economy and society elevates sociopathy by design.

The "difference of opinion" is a fundamental difference in ideology and motivations, not to mention day to day operating differences.

[skygazer]

I think the opinion that the grand parent identifies as sociopathic wasn’t the board’s or even Altman’s, but of the masses on HN shocked by the event. The opinions of the majority here are the “sociopathy.”

[CPLX]

I’m not painting that broadly I’m talking about participants in the comments section on the website of one specific private equity firm.

[bbor]

You don’t need to be a sociopath to be conditioned into holding sociopathic views. Plus, I think your objection is relying really heavily on “benign” — in a situation of this gravity, who’s to say what’s benignly relative and what’s worth arguing about?

[skygazer]

Perhaps HN visitors are not benign, I have no idea. They mostly seem reasonable and friendly to me. I’m only saying calling groups of people you don’t know any particular thing, who are not homogeneous, is fraught and uncharitable. Not to mention thinking you’re the only person with moral clarity amongst your heathen peers, is, well, not a recipe for a great time. Why even come here then?

[bbor]

People with non-benign views are still worth talking to :). I bet some of my current views turn out to be harmful and regrettable in hindsight. Definitely didn’t mean to attack the inherent/essential character of Hacker News Residents, just defend the original point and point out the inherent validity of calling a particular belief set “sociopathic”

[karmasimida]

There is no board, only Ilya