Sam Altman wins power struggle, returns to OpenAI with new board

Altman has agreement to return, while most of the board that fired him is out.

See full article...

 

[Elon Muskie Admirer]

Not good.

His risk taking is going to increase when there are no controls over him, which in this case can be disasterous for the entire species.

 

[Cupid Stunt]

And now he returns to complete his mission to destroy humanity.

 

[just_another_troll]

Curious. How much did Emmett Shear bank for his 2 or 3 days as CEO?

 

[barich]

Not good.

His risk taking is going to increase when there are no controls over him, which in this case can be disasterous for the entire species.

I think my irony meter just broke.

 

[imchillyb]

This whole OpenAI mess is: Referees versus players.

The refs called foul and both the player and manager threatened the referee organization and won.

Now the uncompromised refs are out and there’ll be new pro-player refs installed.

The only winners are the players. MS and Altman in this case.

 

[Defenestrar]

Nadella made Microsoft look great through the process and made sure to keep access to AI development regardless of which path resulted. That might even be worth an OpenAI board position - giving MS an even better footing against other established competition looking to use AI.

 

[Teamsprocket]

I think the threat of a complete exodus of the staff (effectively killing OpenAI as an entity at all), plus the threats of multiple investors (including Microsoft), were taken pretty seriously.

Which is rather surprising. Usually from what I've seen, Boards of Directors have a "know your place" attitude.

 

[Navalia Vigilate]

Unbridled capitalism wins nearly every time.

 

[Atterus]

Great... more widespread misuse of AI and a clown without a clue telling congress how to regulate them... not a scientist in sight...

 

[TommyS]

Why Larry Summers? Hasn't he already done enough harm to humanity? He hates the working class.

 

[nehinks]

So disturbing. Seemed like having the board was the only thing holding him back from completely ignoring any impact or moral issues. It's pretty clear the non-profits charter is completely dead at this point. Basically a speed run of Google going from "Don't be evil" to today's data overlords.

To be clear, I don't think they're going to produce AGI. Our current AI approach is not going to automagically suddenly evolve to become greater than the sun of its parts. There's no mechanism there for sentience or sapience. But that's not to say they can't do a LOT of damage to society with the current "fake" AI.

 

[Eldorito]

Interesting that Altman didn't just work with Microsoft on a new chip venture, since Microsoft are building AI chips anyway.

What a rollercoaster ride though, thanks for covering it so well and professionally Ars.

 

[jonah]

Please explain how Altman has done anything “for the benefit of humanity.”

Because all I’ve seen is a guy wanting push far faster than sensible controls can evolve, resulting in dangerous nonsense being ubiquitous on the internet.

 

[atomic.banjo]

Why Larry Summers? Hasn't he already done enough harm to humanity? He hates the working class.

Probably so he can give them tips on how to get those annoying employees in line.

 

[Oh look spaces]

So commercial interests win. AI speedrun here we come.

 

[Nygis]

Coming soon to Netflix

 

[Orange Crush]

I'd really like to know what the board members were trying to accomplish with this failed coup and how they arrived at the decision this was the right path forward. It was abrupt, sneaky and the official statements have been very vague.

There absolutely need to be ethical safeguards in the commercialization of AI, but the members of this board misfired and have now completely cut themselves out of any decision making on the mater. Why?

 

[barackorama]

Ah yes, Quora CEO Adam D'Angelo who was supposedly the one refusing to reach out to Sam and who is currently in charge of Poe, a feature for feature copy of ChatGPT that can use ChatGPT or other backends?

No conflict of interest at all.

Maybe this isn’t what caused Sam to be pushed out but that this was a power play on someone’s part seems pretty clear.

 

[ip_what]

Nadella made Microsoft look great through the process and made sure to keep access to AI development regardless of which path resulted. That might even be worth an OpenAI board position - giving MS an even better footing against other established competition looking to use AI.

I believe with the current corporate structure investors can’t be board members. I wouldn’t bet on OpenAI retaining its current governance model, however

 

[whiteknave]

To be clear, I don't think they're going to produce AGI. Our current AI approach is not going to automagically suddenly evolve to become greater than the sun of its parts. There's no mechanism there for sentience or sapience. But that's not to say they can't do a LOT of damage to society with the current "fake" AI.

Most of the direct damage* will not come directly from OpenAI, but from people who misuse or misunderstand OpenAI's products such as UnitedHealthcare.

* not including the damage to creators by training the AIs on copyrighted material

 

[numerobis]

View: https://youtu.be/r6l_9reaLz0?si=P21SDEhufulpRP8y&t=12

More like: "You come at the king, you best have some fucking notion of what happens after"

 

[Thispaceforsale]

Doorbuster Black Friday tech deals on CEOs!
warranty is probably worth the upsell

 

[pauleyc]

Most of the direct damage* will not come directly from OpenAI, but from people who misuse or misunderstand OpenAI's products such as UnitedHealthcare.

* not including the damage to creators by training the AIs on copyrighted material

Ah, the "guns don't kill people" defense.

 

[whiteknave]

which raised questions for the board about how OpenAI's technology or intellectual property could be used.

Oh, they are just now starting to ask those questions? They should have been asking those questions the whole time, including while training their systems on copyrighted material.

 

[Fred Duck]

This whole OpenAI mess is: Referees versus players.

From what I've read, it seems that one day, the board simply sacked Altman for being "not consistently candid in his communications with the board."

It didn't seem that at any point the board ever talked with him about their concerns and is that reason given strong enough for an immediate red card?

 

[clackerd]

Maybe the real treasure is the permanent wtf face we all had throughout this bumbling, dumb series of events

 

[informationsuperhighway]

Why Larry Summers? Hasn't he already done enough harm to humanity? He hates the working class.

We are doomed. they are gonna put a brick on the AI Accelerator pedal and its move fast break things.

 

[lightistooslow]

This whole OpenAI mess is: Referees versus players.

The refs called foul and both the player and manager threatened the referee organization and won.

Now the uncompromised refs are out and there’ll be new pro-player refs installed.

The only winners are the players. MS and Altman in this case.

Refs were refereeing the wrong game it would seem - multibillion dollar for-profit company is an awkward fit for an idealistic non-profit board. Why anyone thought that would ever work long-term is beyond me.

 

[whiteknave]

Ah, the "guns don't kill people" defense.

That was not my intent at all.

A poorly designed automobile (such as the old Ford Pinto) can cause damage with normal use due to its design. But even a well-designed automobile can cause damage if driven into a crowd of people. The manufacturer is responsible for the damage caused by the design of the product, but is not necessarily responsible for how the product is used.

 

[Yep It's Me]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-wT7sijLIs

 

[Snarky Robot]

Mixed bag of stuff here.

• I think it’s probably good (for multiple reasons) that Microsoft didn’t end up owning the whole venture.
• I think it sucks that one of the lead scientists will be departing the board. You shouldn’t replace ALL leadership with business-minded people.
• I think it’s good that the Board will grow (hopefully to an uneven number.
• I think it’s good that the Board saw what can happen when things aren’t well-executed
• I consider it VERY good that they are confronted with the reality that their mission might be for naught if they do try to just blow things up; that business interests would just mean that other, more powerful companies would immediately snap up the pieces.

This all could have and should have been handled internally a lot sooner than it was just “ready, fire, aim”. But once it wasn’t this seems like a relatively good outcome. As much more power the business-minded folks are, they’d be a lot worse installed all across the industry, and making Microsoft that much more powerful. And next time, they may consider that while business shouldn’t be their mandate, you can’t eliminate it as a consideration entirely without diminishing your power to actually effect change on AI policy.

The non-profit should definitely take up more budget to speed up efforts to create draft legislation around this stuff. That’s how you actually affect the most change here: run your own business to make money as responsibly as possible while ALSO working to get legislation that tempers the entire industry, including your own.

 

[sakete]

We are doomed. they are gonna put a brick on the AI Accelerator pedal and its move fast break things.

We all have to die at some point anyway. It's the next stage of evolution, going fully digital.

/s

 

[numerobis]

Refs were refereeing the wrong game it would seem - multibillion dollar for-profit company is an awkward fit for an idealistic non-profit board. Why anyone thought that would ever work long-term is beyond me.

The refs weren't refereeing, they were just bumbling about. The governance is a bit wonky, ok. That doesn't explain the board taking out the leadership and not having a working plan for what happens after.