[anonymouskimmer]

> this much damage to the OpenAI brand

Can you quantify and specify the brand damage? I only see some possible damage to current and possible future employee morale (in that some of them are quitting and others may be less inclined to take a job there). Do you see this as seriously affecting relationships with companies such as Microsoft? With end-users?

[jacquesm]

> Do you see this as seriously affecting relationships with companies such as Microsoft? With end-users?

Absolutely. If there isn't a very good reason why they did this in this way then I fully expect the board to be replaced.

[sudosysgen]

Who is going to be replacing the board? Who has that authority?

[jacquesm]

Depending on how the bylaws are put together: the donors, the beneficiaries, the employees of the non-profit and any other stakeholders. Any of those acting alone or in concert could petition a court if the board doesn't voluntarily resign. And if the board split on this issue is a close one then that might happen easier.

[bbor]

I find the idea that some random court filing would succeed in recalling the board of the most high profile technology company in the world, based on “we felt that they were brusque and unprofessional”, to be very unlikely. I mean, MAYBE if some of them started going to prison, but otherwise… this seems like the realm of politics more than court proceedings. But maybe I’m missing some precedents?

[jacquesm]

How does 'we backtracked and re-instated him because we made an oopsie' sound compared to a 'random court filing'?

And yes, there are plenty of precedents of board members being recalled, most of them aren't stupid enough to fight it, especially not non-profit board members, who are supposed to do this all for glory and sunshine. Typically they are presented with a pre-written one pager with date and place already filled in and all they do is sign it or they'll find their position to be up for a vote. And of course, the ranks could close around this decision but that might make some extremely powerful enemies. Think 'Microsoft', Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, Reid Hoffman, YC, Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, Amazon Web Services (AWS), and Infosys.

The combined onslaught of that would annihilate the board. So unless they made very sure they had plenty of backing on this decision they set themselves up for a very difficult situation.

[swalkergibson]

Their relationship with MSFT is now effectively over.

They will remain aboard for as long as it takes to find a suitable replacement.

[bbor]

I don’t get why people aren’t seeing this. OpenAI said they’d achieve AGI by December. It’s mid November. When they claim to have achieved AGI, Microsoft’s deal with them ends immediately. Sam Altman is a practical man who thinks a lot about server costs, and Ilya is a terrified man who thinks a lot about potential catastrophe. Sam recently bragged about “pushing back the veil of ignorance”, and Ilya is working full-time on alignment techniques.

Why the dominant narrative isn’t “they’re probably disagreeing over the AGI status of a GPT5 ensemble because it affects their relationship w/ Microsoft” I have NO idea, and I’m trying to keep my head down and not let it all drive me crazy with anxiety…

Much love to the fellow hackers out there. If I’m anywhere close to right-ish, then I’m looking forward to exploring the post-SV/VC world with you.

[jacquesm]

I'd love to know how necessary the donations to the non-profit still are now that the commercial venture has picked up. But MSFT might want to re-think their OpenAI integration efforts at this point.