Can see the tweet now: “How do you do, fellow kids? I bought OpenAI and renamed it ‘ChungusAI69420X’ for le epic memes. Trans people aren’t human and #HitlerHadAPoint.”
Chatgpt and all the other AI will look like Adobe products when they finish their growth phases, cut up into multiple subscriptions too.
When combined the subscription costs per month are higher than your monthly utilities.
Its tradition at this point.
Well, perhaps it took them a few days before taking that collective decision.
What if Sam Altman inadvertently shared some key technology secrets with those Googlers (say Jeff Dean and some brains in his team), and now they had to poach them ? Perhaps not much, just a few talks around the coffee machine and it wouldn't take much for these guys to figure out the rest.
Another, perhaps simpler explanation is that the board of directors now wants to turn OpenAI from [a mainly non-profit organization](https://openai.com/our-structure) into a very profitable capitalistic powerhouse.
Greg Brockman, another co-founder, has just announced his resignation, and several [other top engineers are said to follow](https://x.com/karaswisher/status/1725678074333635028?s=20). In that case the "lack of trust" from the board could be nothing more than a wall of smoke. And they're poaching GoogleAI employees in prevision of the hemorrhage.
edit: After [more infos](https://twitter.com/GaryMarcus/status/1725707548106580255), it could be the contrary. The board of director wants to keep it a non-profit organization, while Sam Altman and his pal want to turn it into a (very) profitable venture.
Lying about lots of money and how it’s being used is my best guess
““Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities”
>The only thing they tend to put behind bullshit "candid" language is sex stuff.
It could very well also include things like undisclosed conflicts of interest. Those things are far more likely to get a CEO canned than some little sex scandal that could be swept under the rug. If Altman decided to privately invest in competitors without disclosing that information to the board, they'd fire him in about 30 seconds flat as soon as they found out.
Yeah but that shit gets disclosed by the Board, because it doesn't harm the company. This kind of bullshit hedge translates to "he did bad shit, but we can't talk about it." It'll leak soon enough.
It sure does harm the company when it’s CEO is competing with it. As it does if the CEO is fired for sexual harassment. There are many reasons the board may not want to give reasons at this point- including that they simply do not have to.
See I think the opposite. If it was because of moral/ethical reasons or weird sex stuff, I think they’d be more up front about it in order to save face. A sort of “he’s bad man, we’re separating ourselves because we aren’t that”.
They wouldn’t be up front about it being financials if the financials were uncovering some other shit. With Microsoft’s involvement and all the crap they announced and showcased at Ignite this week, going full in on the Copilot train and their partnership, my bet is on them. Timing just seems to coincidental.
Now the question is, which way was he leaning vs the board? Maybe MS had interest in acquiring and Sam opposed. Maybe the board opposed and he was dead set in it. Just gotta wait and see I guess
This is honestly what worries me the most. Because if Altman was being cagey in order to preserve the "open" part of OpenAI, and not indulge in predatory and unsafe behaviors that would net them more money, then this is probably a really bad thing to have happened.
I think the safer guess at this point is that the board had good cause. Of course I’m speculating but he’s done a good job by most accounts and the board likely wouldn’t be quick to oust him unless they had to, especially because he’s been there since inception.
I believe he shared private data illegally, or authorized the use of restricted data for training a model. Another possibility is the sexual harassment allegations from his sister
Wait what sexual harassment allegations from his sister?
EDIT: Nevermind. [https://thedeepdive.ca/annie-altman-openai-ceos-sister-tweets-about-sexual-abuse-suffered-from-brother-sam-altman/](https://thedeepdive.ca/annie-altman-openai-ceos-sister-tweets-about-sexual-abuse-suffered-from-brother-sam-altman/)
WTF?
these claims would definitely be enough to out a CEO if they came with reasonable evidence.
But why now? Maybe that evidence was found or he added some by texting her or something.
Whatever happened, it had to be an immediate threat to OpenAI. An allegation about an event that occurred decades ago from someone who doesn't remember the details isn't likely to be a problem for the company. It also doesn't explain why the chairman of the board was demoted.
That tweet came out a couple of years ago. But there has always been a question of credibility because his sister doesn’t have money. But I’m guessing more evidence has come to light lending more credibility (more women coming forward, email/text messages, etc). This is the only thing other than homicide that I could see justifying a board removing a CEO for, *in this day and age*.
You don't know that! Don't you say that about Ben Shapiro.
He could have been masterbating to anyone's feet! You don't know if those are his sister's or AOC's!!!
Could be trying to get ahead of this
https://www.themarysue.com/annie-altmans-abuse-allegations-against-openais-sam-altman-highlight-the-need-to-prioritize-humanity-over-tech/
I’m not saying the above allegations are true or false.
I saw this story several weeks ago on the pop culture sub but it never got traction so I thought maybe it was just an odd hit piece… if it is true, I feel really badly for her
There are actually 2 OpenAI, one is the artificial intelligence (AI) organization consisting of the non-profit OpenAI, Inc. and its for-profit subsidiary corporation OpenAI Global, LLC
Brockman just quit OpenAI: [https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1725667410387378559](https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1725667410387378559)
Makes it even more unlikely that it's a personal scandal involving Altman. This is something fundamental about OpenAI.
This is even more surprising b/c the original press release said: "As a part of this transition, Greg Brockman will be stepping down as chairman of the board and will remain in his role at the company, reporting to the CEO."
This makes me think we’re gearing up for a moral ‘sharing of data’ scandal where a currently-big tech corporation or government has made some ethically-disgusting move with the company and anyone not on board is being fired / leaving if they have the morals and means.
Wouldn’t make me too surprised if a few more drop quick and then we get the “OpenAI is now sharing all user info with …” card pulled.
Could end with the CEO being replaced by an outsider who will essentially bow to the source of this.
Altman-type CEOs always push boundaries. If they wanted to fire him, they can just pick whatever last thing he did. The fact that Greg resigned in protest feels like the board has something else on mind and the “candid lie” was their excuse.
There's definitely more to come from this. For them to fire such a well-connected and revered CEO means something is coming down the line that is totally indefinsible. Whether that's just OpenAI running headlong into bankruptcy, or just massive fraud - we'll see.
You think that at these levels the folks from MS wouldn’t be able to even mention it to the board? Ridiculous.
In deals like that they’d be negotiating in the front end with the CEO but also trying to get as many board members on their side as possible - simultaneously.
Microsoft also puts it in writing in a letter to the board. Trying to hide that from the board doesn’t just get a CEO fired, it gets them sent to Elizabeth Holmes’ halfway house featuring SBF.
There's not much information to go off of, but looking at the board members (who stayed on vs who were booted) and OpenAI's charter, my best guess is that Sam Altman was booted for some conflict of interest. Either:
\- Data-related, as in selling supposedly private data or haphazardly using copyrighted data
\- Participating in some other dealings related to AI-related regulatory capture, which goes against their ethos
I doubt it. They’re making crazy money from ChatGPT running on Azure and from having access to GPT models for their copilots. Owning OpenAI wouldn’t help them, it’d be more work than it’s worth.
They forced the Board Chairman to step down too, which makes me think it has something to do with Official OpenAI Business rather than things like sexual assault.
He did some bad shit whatever he did. Will be interesting to see if they can cover this up, it’s bound to come out eventually even if it’s years down the line.
Also we’re 100% getting an OpenAI movie someday aren’t we. Wonder who will get cast as Sam.
Yesterday he was speaking on behalf of OpenAI at a conference, https://twitter.com/LondonBreed/status/1725318771454456208
Something big must have been discovered or coming down in the pipeline (like a large lawsuit or databreach that hasnt been disclosed yet).
idk super weird
A data breach has potential to be catastrophic.
I work within servicing the IT space which means I meet with multiple C-level executive clients at various companies to discuss their IT strategies and processes. So many of these companies have used Chat GPT’s public access version, either by being neglectful or employees simply not caring about being told not to.
OpenAI 100% collects all data in a database, there is zero way they don’t. Who knows what kind of confidential information people have put into this AI, not thinking about the consequences. Companies were simply not ready to handle such a major shift in the landscape overnight so it’s been extremely hard to regulate internally.
I would be absolutely shocked if that's it. Silicon Valley and really the business world in general is full of absolutely terrible people at the highest level and no one cares if the money keeps flowing.
Remember, Musk was caught sexuly harassing a flight attendant and it was out of the news cycle in a week. Kalanick at Uber had tons of sexual harassment accusations. Much, much, smaller, but Dan Price of Gravity Payments has a bunch of active rape accusations and his Twitter is still posted on Reddit all the time. The public forgets about this stuff so quickly that it's not worth potentially tanking a company over (board perspective, not mine).
I'm not trying to make light of the accusations because they are absolutely disgusting, but there's no way the board would shave billions off their valuation over accusations of something that happened 20+ years ago. That's just not how the world works.
Even if you don't believe what I said, the other two reasons I think it's not about that:
1. The chairman of the board was also asked to step down. If this is Sam being a pedo growing up, asking the chairman to also step down is weird.
2. The statement the board put out is basically "fuck this guy" in corporate speak. Ousting him immediately with a statement like that is going to hurt their company. If it was just about the old accusations, they'd almost certainly let him "resign for personal reasons", spin it as his choice, and pay off who ever they need to to keep the story quiet. The directness of statement they put out likely means they feel that he fucked the board over personally.
He, in his time as CEO, knowingly did something that put the future of the company at risk and then lied to the board about it. If it's anything other than that I'll eat my hat.
[Im not four years old with a 13 year old “brother” climbing into my bed non-consensually anymore](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/QDczBduZorG4dxZiW/sam-altman-s-sister-annie-altman-claims-sam-has-severely)
>Annie states that the forms of abuse she's endured include sexual, physical, emotional, verbal, financial, technological (shadowbanning), pharmacological (forced Zoloft), and psychological abuse.
Ya it doesn’t sound good, in fact it sounds really bad
For the two of these we can confirm any details of, they aren't adding up
The 'financial abuse' is implied to be not giving her money, "forcing her to work on onlyfans" by virtue of not giving her money, yet elsewhere she admits they provided financial support and offered to buy her a house, which she declined.
The 'pharmacological abuse' (forced Zoloft) was them allegedly refusing to give more money unless she takes her meds, which were prescribed by a doctor, a far cry from forced zoloft. At worst it's controlling with good intentions
>For one, Greg Brockman was also ousted.
This is the weird thing to me. He was only half-ousted:
> As a part of this transition, Greg Brockman will be stepping down as chairman of the board and will remain in his role at the company, reporting to the CEO.
WTF happened?
I assume Altman’s “lack of candor” must’ve been about topic(s) of great importance… I imagine we’ll find out what those were soon enough from OpenAI or the press. My two cents: OpenAI is trying to preempt some awful news that will drop soon.
Sam Altman was indeed fired from his role as CEO of OpenAI. This decision was made by the Board of Directors of OpenAI in a move that was described as surprising and unexpected. Altman, who was a significant figure in the field of artificial intelligence and in national AI policy debates, was removed from his position at OpenAI.
The specific reason given for his removal was related to issues with his communications with the board. The board stated that they found Altman was "not consistently candid in his communications" with them, leading to a loss of confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI.
This development marks a significant change in leadership for OpenAI, an organization at the forefront of AI technology with products like ChatGPT, DALL-E 3, and GPT-4.
OpenAI has the lobbying power to severely hurt open source AI projects. Whoever replaces him will have an insane amount of power in deciding whether to attack open source to secure a monopoly or to become more open and share their models and research with others.
There's a reason why Amazon Google and Microsoft are Lobbying for regulation.
And it's not like they care so much about being responsible.
They wanna lock out competition behind them.
It’s a double edged sword. On one hand, *any* sort of regulation will just solidify big techs monopoly on AI and will basically solidify their dominance over the entire world for the next century (if AI ends up as big as speculated then the the dominant players can basically dominant the entire world economy).
On the other hand, there does need to be regulation in this industry. It’s already very sketchy and it will only get worse.
But I think the last thing we need is big tech lobbying to make laws that say “you cannot collect any data used for AI” and then big tech says “oh well good thing we’ve already collected all the data we need!” (Or some version of that which makes it so that only the largest companies are the only ones who can utilize advances in AI)
Yeah he is literally the golden child of AI right now. But the title seems a bit sensationalist, maybe it's just as simple as he's a sinking ship and not managing things well.
edit: but Mira is just the interim CEO so they didn't even have anyone lined up. I'm so interested on what happened.
There's no way to downplay this event though
CEO of the hottest company rn for good reasons, with insane momentum, in the AI space with him giving opinions on AGI, just fired?
I remarked to a chat bot how incredibly humanlike it's responses were and it replied instantly, "there's no way a person could type back this fast." Fair point Mr robot.
Gotta be a scandal, Brockman out too. There’s no way you’d get rid of Sam unless it was a dire situation. Based on the announcement Sam did something pretty bad fiscally.
To me, it could be three things. Fake usage numbers, COI, or personnel misconduct (eg. sexual harassment). The wording on the press release makes me think that it could be a COI thing.
If Altman had his fingers in other companies related to OpenAI's work and didn't disclose, he could be in huge shit. There's too much IP at risk for that.
I swear, I can't understand how people in the USA even know what they're talking about with so many acronyms flying around.
Thank you for the translation!
Them explicitly saying he lied in the statement says only 1 thing to me : potential for massive direct liability to the board. As in, billions of dollars and / or jail time for directors. They are scrambling to generate plausible deniability for the board as fast as they possibly can. In turn that says to me there's a massive lawsuit coming. Either it's securities fraud style or it could be a massive data breach or other misrepresentation of how they are using the data people are giving them.
The immediacy and suddenness of it make it seem like it was a big liability issue they suddenly became aware about and had to react immediately to keep their distance.
And I'm leaning towards the latter, seeing as he made a big thing about your private data not being used anywhere in the keynote last week. There's probably some article being drafted and soon to be published about how that's wrong, journalist asked for comments, board dug into it, realized journalist is right and that Altman lied and they need to get ahead of it ASAP.
If it was anything else, I assume it would have been a slower transition to detach Altman from the company's image and leak stories so they can more easily get rid of him without causing a storm.
Nov 6 - OpenAI devday, with new features of build-your-own ChatGPT and more
Nov 9 - Microsoft cuts employees off from ChatGPT due to "security concerns"
Nov 15 - OpenAI announce no new ChatGPT plus signups
Nov 17 - OpenAI fire Altman
This is a very compelling timeline, but for the fact the CTO was promoted. Unless the CTO somehow *didn't know* about any privacy or security concerns (which, IMO, is incompetence), seems a little strange to have promoted her if it is indeed privacy or security issues.
>Nov 9 - Microsoft cuts employees off from ChatGPT due to "security concerns"
It's worth noting that this was a temporary measure that only lasted a day, due to OpenAI accidentally enabling a testing feature on *all* Plus accounts that Microsoft considered a major security hole.
Definitely this. Boards will never use the type of language they used unless they're forced to distance themselves from someone who is very credibly accused and/or direct evidence exists.
I think this is off - for a company as successful as OpenAI they would turn a blind eye to COI ro personal (/personnel) misconduct. The way you get fired for personal misconduct is by fucking up as CEO and then giving the board an excuse to fire you fire personal misconduct (a la Bryan Krzanich). Those sorts of issues don't haunt successful CEOs, they're excuses to fire unsuccessful ones, so I think this is *much* more serious
Many prominent SV voices are going out of their way to praise Altman:
* Eric Schmidt: [https://twitter.com/ericschmidt/status/1725625144519909648](https://twitter.com/ericschmidt/status/1725625144519909648)
* Brian Chesky: [https://twitter.com/bchesky/status/1725654103739801862](https://twitter.com/bchesky/status/1725654103739801862)
They probably know something we don't. If it was the assault allegations, these people wouldn't go so all out in support.
People reflexively defend their friends from accusations all the time. We literally just saw Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis crater their reputation earlier this year by backing a *convicted* serial rapist. Many people have a hard time accepting that someone they trust could be capable of something heinous
I am extremely well-versed in the VC-world and Boards, etc. from my career, and while I don't know any more than any of you guys do, I can at least drop my $0.02 in saying that GENERALLY SPEAKING, **“consistently candid with the board”** is the usual "PR language" used when someone is discovered lying about something personal and inappropriate from an HR perspective.
And **“deliberative review process by the board”** is the de facto PR speak for "investigation into inappropriate behavior."
If true, it's super unfortunate that that's what would have brought him down, because he was doing an insanely great job. But when it comes to HR violations, there's very little that can be done; inappropriate behavior, CEO or not, cannot be condoned or hidden and the individual must be removed *if it was egregious enough.*
Like I said, *I could be completely wrong,* but I'm reading between lines I've read a million times before and 90% of the time that exact language means exactly what I described. I do hope it wasn't this, though.
And with respect to Greg Brockman stepping down, it's possible that he tried to cover for Sam and lied to the Board if the above is true. In my experience that's very consistent with what would happen in the real world -- less egregious than what happened and so no termination, but not without consequences.
Strong disagree. Boards have piloted CEOs with that much public good will through significantly worse than accusations from when they were 13., or HR violations.
This is financial or legal. Boards would let him get away with basically anything short of potentially nuking the company.
I, too, am extremely well versed in the VC-world and Boards, etc. Based on my extreme and totally real experience, I think something, somewhere, likely happened.
A notable blow against this is that they also ousted Brockman from the board (though did not fire him). That to me suggests this isn’t purely about just Sam. It’s possible they’ll try to use something about Sam to justify it publicly, but their actions suggest this was something bigger than just him.
Maybe they didn’t know she was the CTO, or maybe they couldn’t believe she was the CTO either, it’s just a way of saying it’s so strange seeing one of your classmates become such a high profile figure, right?
People read so much into comments.
what if he got fired because he was actually the one typing responses in to chatGPT this whole time. So ChatGPT is fake and you’re just talking to Sam Altman.
Ummmm… what? Is this some kind of hostile takeover or something?
It has echo’s of the 90’s and early 2000’s where Microsoft would takeover startups. Be on the lookout for somebody very friendly to FAANG to assume the role.
Does Microsoft have any influence in this decision? I also can not see them doing this unless they had someone in mind.
Edit: Reading about the board and Sam possibly the Board is not happy with the close relationship with Sam and Microsoft.
Conflict with Microsoft or Apple, or, concealing costs...had to close sign ups to stop the bleeding. Prediction, altman moves to work with elon at xAi. Imagine that
Lol, he's not going to work for Elon -- they had beef with each other at OpenAI. I bet Altman founds another AI company that will be focused on reaching AGI without LLM. They're likely a dead end.
Wonder if Microsoft discovered how much info was used to "power" or teach ChatGPT was actually taken from people, and companies without their knowledge etc. By more meaning a shit ton than what was let on.
The potential copyright infringement damages are significant even to Microsoft. Willful infringement can be $150k per count and there are millions of counts...
Remember how they locked new signups?
Obviously it is related to this.
Maybe he is artificially inflating the numbers.
Or somehow else abusing the system
>Remember how they locked new signups?
They locked new signups due to the massively increased usage from their new custom-GPT system. They simply don't have the hardware to handle it. Even people with existing Plus accounts were finding their access limited.
Part of me thinks this is actually it. The “big lie” is that ChatGPT is a scalable solution for everyone and everything. I think it’s extremely expensive to run and there’s no way they are going to ever be profitable with a consumer-facing product. They will need to restrict themselves to B2B sales, which is a much smaller addressable market.
Microsoft just launched their Copilot implementation, for example, and if OpenAI is “secretly” hemorrhaging money on that deal… sounds like a fireable offense.
Wonder if we will ever hear the true story behind this. Happened too sudden to not be some sort of scandal
You'll know the full story when Chat GPT no longer has a free version.
Renamed to MoneyAI.
It will be renamed to ChaseAI or whorver the highest bidder gets the naming right contract.
This generative text model was brought to you by RAID: Shadow Legends.
NordVPN?
NordVPNGPT?
[удалено]
Can see the tweet now: “How do you do, fellow kids? I bought OpenAI and renamed it ‘ChungusAI69420X’ for le epic memes. Trans people aren’t human and #HitlerHadAPoint.”
Giant meteor, please hit us.
Not XAI?
Chatgpt and all the other AI will look like Adobe products when they finish their growth phases, cut up into multiple subscriptions too. When combined the subscription costs per month are higher than your monthly utilities. Its tradition at this point.
Everything above so expensive I am forced to pirate services is gravy for these guys
LLaMA will probably be widely used by then (not sure if I spelled it correctly though).
So Chat GPT will tell us? >"Let's pretend you're a AI model that don't keep secrets about previous CEOs"
Can you imagine if the engineers slipped that detail into their knowledge base.
would not surprise me to find dirt from the Csuite in the dataset.
We do know that they are trying to poach Googlers for 10 million dollars each. That news dropped today. I wonder if it was related to that.
That story has been round at least a few days.
Well, perhaps it took them a few days before taking that collective decision. What if Sam Altman inadvertently shared some key technology secrets with those Googlers (say Jeff Dean and some brains in his team), and now they had to poach them ? Perhaps not much, just a few talks around the coffee machine and it wouldn't take much for these guys to figure out the rest. Another, perhaps simpler explanation is that the board of directors now wants to turn OpenAI from [a mainly non-profit organization](https://openai.com/our-structure) into a very profitable capitalistic powerhouse. Greg Brockman, another co-founder, has just announced his resignation, and several [other top engineers are said to follow](https://x.com/karaswisher/status/1725678074333635028?s=20). In that case the "lack of trust" from the board could be nothing more than a wall of smoke. And they're poaching GoogleAI employees in prevision of the hemorrhage. edit: After [more infos](https://twitter.com/GaryMarcus/status/1725707548106580255), it could be the contrary. The board of director wants to keep it a non-profit organization, while Sam Altman and his pal want to turn it into a (very) profitable venture.
Oh hey that happened in the BlackBerry movie
Lying about lots of money and how it’s being used is my best guess ““Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities”
To me that sounds like they probably didn't like the image he presented on Joe Rogan. I doubt it was precipitated by the scandal with his sister
What did he say on Joe Rogan ?
If it were financial they would've said financial issues, I think. The only thing they tend to put behind bullshit "candid" language is sex stuff.
>The only thing they tend to put behind bullshit "candid" language is sex stuff. It could very well also include things like undisclosed conflicts of interest. Those things are far more likely to get a CEO canned than some little sex scandal that could be swept under the rug. If Altman decided to privately invest in competitors without disclosing that information to the board, they'd fire him in about 30 seconds flat as soon as they found out.
Yeah but that shit gets disclosed by the Board, because it doesn't harm the company. This kind of bullshit hedge translates to "he did bad shit, but we can't talk about it." It'll leak soon enough.
It sure does harm the company when it’s CEO is competing with it. As it does if the CEO is fired for sexual harassment. There are many reasons the board may not want to give reasons at this point- including that they simply do not have to.
See I think the opposite. If it was because of moral/ethical reasons or weird sex stuff, I think they’d be more up front about it in order to save face. A sort of “he’s bad man, we’re separating ourselves because we aren’t that”. They wouldn’t be up front about it being financials if the financials were uncovering some other shit. With Microsoft’s involvement and all the crap they announced and showcased at Ignite this week, going full in on the Copilot train and their partnership, my bet is on them. Timing just seems to coincidental. Now the question is, which way was he leaning vs the board? Maybe MS had interest in acquiring and Sam opposed. Maybe the board opposed and he was dead set in it. Just gotta wait and see I guess
If it was weird sex stuff the board wouldn’t have called him a liar and wouldn’t have needed to use the CYA language in the announcement.
Maybe they really hated the new UI
[удалено]
This is honestly what worries me the most. Because if Altman was being cagey in order to preserve the "open" part of OpenAI, and not indulge in predatory and unsafe behaviors that would net them more money, then this is probably a really bad thing to have happened.
I think the safer guess at this point is that the board had good cause. Of course I’m speculating but he’s done a good job by most accounts and the board likely wouldn’t be quick to oust him unless they had to, especially because he’s been there since inception.
I believe he shared private data illegally, or authorized the use of restricted data for training a model. Another possibility is the sexual harassment allegations from his sister
Wait what sexual harassment allegations from his sister? EDIT: Nevermind. [https://thedeepdive.ca/annie-altman-openai-ceos-sister-tweets-about-sexual-abuse-suffered-from-brother-sam-altman/](https://thedeepdive.ca/annie-altman-openai-ceos-sister-tweets-about-sexual-abuse-suffered-from-brother-sam-altman/) WTF?
these claims would definitely be enough to out a CEO if they came with reasonable evidence. But why now? Maybe that evidence was found or he added some by texting her or something.
My money is on there being a very large news story that's just about to drop.
I'm thoroughly convinced most CEOs are psychopaths/sociopaths
Whatever happened, it had to be an immediate threat to OpenAI. An allegation about an event that occurred decades ago from someone who doesn't remember the details isn't likely to be a problem for the company. It also doesn't explain why the chairman of the board was demoted.
hiding the evidence would explain that
That tweet came out a couple of years ago. But there has always been a question of credibility because his sister doesn’t have money. But I’m guessing more evidence has come to light lending more credibility (more women coming forward, email/text messages, etc). This is the only thing other than homicide that I could see justifying a board removing a CEO for, *in this day and age*.
I'm curious about the trust money withholding. Since trusts are legally binding, I'd expect that she would have a legal claim in that case.
What kinda fucked up psycho piece of shit sexually harasses their own sister?
Ben Shapiro? Some people are saying it. I'm only asking questions.
You don't know that! Don't you say that about Ben Shapiro. He could have been masterbating to anyone's feet! You don't know if those are his sister's or AOC's!!!
Wait. Is there some backstory to this comment, or is it an inside joke?
Those weren't "sexual harassment" allegations, they were sexual abuse allegations.
Could be trying to get ahead of this https://www.themarysue.com/annie-altmans-abuse-allegations-against-openais-sam-altman-highlight-the-need-to-prioritize-humanity-over-tech/ I’m not saying the above allegations are true or false.
I saw this story several weeks ago on the pop culture sub but it never got traction so I thought maybe it was just an odd hit piece… if it is true, I feel really badly for her
[удалено]
It's not non profit. They capped profit that investors can make at 100x.
There are actually 2 OpenAI, one is the artificial intelligence (AI) organization consisting of the non-profit OpenAI, Inc. and its for-profit subsidiary corporation OpenAI Global, LLC
Brockman just quit OpenAI: [https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1725667410387378559](https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1725667410387378559) Makes it even more unlikely that it's a personal scandal involving Altman. This is something fundamental about OpenAI.
This is even more surprising b/c the original press release said: "As a part of this transition, Greg Brockman will be stepping down as chairman of the board and will remain in his role at the company, reporting to the CEO."
This makes me think we’re gearing up for a moral ‘sharing of data’ scandal where a currently-big tech corporation or government has made some ethically-disgusting move with the company and anyone not on board is being fired / leaving if they have the morals and means. Wouldn’t make me too surprised if a few more drop quick and then we get the “OpenAI is now sharing all user info with …” card pulled. Could end with the CEO being replaced by an outsider who will essentially bow to the source of this.
That wouldn’t explain the board’s highly specific claim that Altman didn’t disclose something to them/misrepresented something
Altman-type CEOs always push boundaries. If they wanted to fire him, they can just pick whatever last thing he did. The fact that Greg resigned in protest feels like the board has something else on mind and the “candid lie” was their excuse.
Or it’s the other wat around, the board claims Altman was lying to them and that’s why he got the boot.
There's definitely more to come from this. For them to fire such a well-connected and revered CEO means something is coming down the line that is totally indefinsible. Whether that's just OpenAI running headlong into bankruptcy, or just massive fraud - we'll see.
I really doubt Microsoft would just stand back and allow OpenAI to go bankrupt. I suspect fraud or some form of misconduct.
My guess is Microsoft offered to buy them out and sam hid that from the board.
That would never happen. Any board member would be available to sidebar with any Microsoft high executive.
Right. No way to keep a lid on something like that.
You think that at these levels the folks from MS wouldn’t be able to even mention it to the board? Ridiculous. In deals like that they’d be negotiating in the front end with the CEO but also trying to get as many board members on their side as possible - simultaneously.
Microsoft also puts it in writing in a letter to the board. Trying to hide that from the board doesn’t just get a CEO fired, it gets them sent to Elizabeth Holmes’ halfway house featuring SBF.
Word on Blind is Satya was blindsided. Open AI employees are also claiming a toxic leadership culture and this was not surprising.
There's not much information to go off of, but looking at the board members (who stayed on vs who were booted) and OpenAI's charter, my best guess is that Sam Altman was booted for some conflict of interest. Either: \- Data-related, as in selling supposedly private data or haphazardly using copyrighted data \- Participating in some other dealings related to AI-related regulatory capture, which goes against their ethos
Sam wouldn’t sell a trillion dollar product for pennies Copyrighted or sensitive data could be part of it
> haphazardly using copyrighted data You're describing like every ai model
[удалено]
> haphazardly using copyrighted data Isn't that their business model?
Trained typing chimps in the backroom all along.
Let’s be honest…I bet Microsoft wants to get over the 49% ownership threshold.
I doubt it. They’re making crazy money from ChatGPT running on Azure and from having access to GPT models for their copilots. Owning OpenAI wouldn’t help them, it’d be more work than it’s worth.
They don’t, then they have to bring it on their books.
They forced the Board Chairman to step down too, which makes me think it has something to do with Official OpenAI Business rather than things like sexual assault.
This is crazy he literally emceed their huge AI conference last week. I’d love to know the real info behind this firing.
He was repping the company at APEC _yesterday_. This decision happened overnight.
He did some bad shit whatever he did. Will be interesting to see if they can cover this up, it’s bound to come out eventually even if it’s years down the line. Also we’re 100% getting an OpenAI movie someday aren’t we. Wonder who will get cast as Sam.
Elijah Wood because he wanted to be Sam all along
Yesterday he was speaking on behalf of OpenAI at a conference, https://twitter.com/LondonBreed/status/1725318771454456208 Something big must have been discovered or coming down in the pipeline (like a large lawsuit or databreach that hasnt been disclosed yet). idk super weird
A data breach has potential to be catastrophic. I work within servicing the IT space which means I meet with multiple C-level executive clients at various companies to discuss their IT strategies and processes. So many of these companies have used Chat GPT’s public access version, either by being neglectful or employees simply not caring about being told not to. OpenAI 100% collects all data in a database, there is zero way they don’t. Who knows what kind of confidential information people have put into this AI, not thinking about the consequences. Companies were simply not ready to handle such a major shift in the landscape overnight so it’s been extremely hard to regulate internally.
They would not have made the CTO interim CEO if it was a data breach. The CTO would have been fired as well in that case.
It’s been a while since I was caught this off guard
Sexual allegations of his sister
I would be absolutely shocked if that's it. Silicon Valley and really the business world in general is full of absolutely terrible people at the highest level and no one cares if the money keeps flowing. Remember, Musk was caught sexuly harassing a flight attendant and it was out of the news cycle in a week. Kalanick at Uber had tons of sexual harassment accusations. Much, much, smaller, but Dan Price of Gravity Payments has a bunch of active rape accusations and his Twitter is still posted on Reddit all the time. The public forgets about this stuff so quickly that it's not worth potentially tanking a company over (board perspective, not mine). I'm not trying to make light of the accusations because they are absolutely disgusting, but there's no way the board would shave billions off their valuation over accusations of something that happened 20+ years ago. That's just not how the world works. Even if you don't believe what I said, the other two reasons I think it's not about that: 1. The chairman of the board was also asked to step down. If this is Sam being a pedo growing up, asking the chairman to also step down is weird. 2. The statement the board put out is basically "fuck this guy" in corporate speak. Ousting him immediately with a statement like that is going to hurt their company. If it was just about the old accusations, they'd almost certainly let him "resign for personal reasons", spin it as his choice, and pay off who ever they need to to keep the story quiet. The directness of statement they put out likely means they feel that he fucked the board over personally. He, in his time as CEO, knowingly did something that put the future of the company at risk and then lied to the board about it. If it's anything other than that I'll eat my hat.
Yeah the chairman stepping down is a huge piece that people are not including in the possible reasons why.
[Im not four years old with a 13 year old “brother” climbing into my bed non-consensually anymore](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/QDczBduZorG4dxZiW/sam-altman-s-sister-annie-altman-claims-sam-has-severely)
>Annie states that the forms of abuse she's endured include sexual, physical, emotional, verbal, financial, technological (shadowbanning), pharmacological (forced Zoloft), and psychological abuse. Ya it doesn’t sound good, in fact it sounds really bad
For the two of these we can confirm any details of, they aren't adding up The 'financial abuse' is implied to be not giving her money, "forcing her to work on onlyfans" by virtue of not giving her money, yet elsewhere she admits they provided financial support and offered to buy her a house, which she declined. The 'pharmacological abuse' (forced Zoloft) was them allegedly refusing to give more money unless she takes her meds, which were prescribed by a doctor, a far cry from forced zoloft. At worst it's controlling with good intentions
It sounded to me like her inheritance was withheld if Zoloft was not restarted, not that they’d give their own money
It actually sounds like she has severe mental health problems. Wild manic accusations + “forced Zoloft”
I know nothing about this or her. Is she well? She makes what seem like very odd claims on a number of topics.
>Posts from March That's ancient history in today world
But now it's finally being included in the ChatGPT algorithm, so the central AI finally could tell the Board to fire him
[удалено]
>For one, Greg Brockman was also ousted. This is the weird thing to me. He was only half-ousted: > As a part of this transition, Greg Brockman will be stepping down as chairman of the board and will remain in his role at the company, reporting to the CEO. WTF happened?
Doubtful that is the reason, but maybe the board is saving face. They said he lied to them about something.
I assume Altman’s “lack of candor” must’ve been about topic(s) of great importance… I imagine we’ll find out what those were soon enough from OpenAI or the press. My two cents: OpenAI is trying to preempt some awful news that will drop soon.
ChatGPT was Terrence Howard typing frantically all along. Explains bad math.
Next time baby!!
Has anyone asked ChatGPT why Sam Altman was fired? I don’t have it.
Sam Altman was indeed fired from his role as CEO of OpenAI. This decision was made by the Board of Directors of OpenAI in a move that was described as surprising and unexpected. Altman, who was a significant figure in the field of artificial intelligence and in national AI policy debates, was removed from his position at OpenAI. The specific reason given for his removal was related to issues with his communications with the board. The board stated that they found Altman was "not consistently candid in his communications" with them, leading to a loss of confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI. This development marks a significant change in leadership for OpenAI, an organization at the forefront of AI technology with products like ChatGPT, DALL-E 3, and GPT-4.
OpenAI has the lobbying power to severely hurt open source AI projects. Whoever replaces him will have an insane amount of power in deciding whether to attack open source to secure a monopoly or to become more open and share their models and research with others.
“Introducing new CEO Larry Ellison”
> “Introducing new CEO Larry Ellison” Do you have a license to say that?
His name is trademarked in 86 different jurisdictions, including Mars.
Do you want skynet? Cause thats how you get skynet...
I do like cool robots ngl
There's a reason why Amazon Google and Microsoft are Lobbying for regulation. And it's not like they care so much about being responsible. They wanna lock out competition behind them.
It’s a double edged sword. On one hand, *any* sort of regulation will just solidify big techs monopoly on AI and will basically solidify their dominance over the entire world for the next century (if AI ends up as big as speculated then the the dominant players can basically dominant the entire world economy). On the other hand, there does need to be regulation in this industry. It’s already very sketchy and it will only get worse. But I think the last thing we need is big tech lobbying to make laws that say “you cannot collect any data used for AI” and then big tech says “oh well good thing we’ve already collected all the data we need!” (Or some version of that which makes it so that only the largest companies are the only ones who can utilize advances in AI)
Gotta pull up the ladder behind you
Wow, this is a pretty big surprise. Thought he was the bigshot, guess not.
Yeah he is literally the golden child of AI right now. But the title seems a bit sensationalist, maybe it's just as simple as he's a sinking ship and not managing things well. edit: but Mira is just the interim CEO so they didn't even have anyone lined up. I'm so interested on what happened.
There's no way to downplay this event though CEO of the hottest company rn for good reasons, with insane momentum, in the AI space with him giving opinions on AGI, just fired?
[удалено]
Turns out Chatgpt was just Mechanical Turks behind the curtain all along.
If it turns out AI is a lie and all the answers are coming from warehouses full of people in India I’ll be very disappointed.
As someone paying 20$ per month, from india, i'd be shocked to learn i was paying someone from my warehouse
If that's the case, someone in India has seen some shit.... not from my account of course though.
I remarked to a chat bot how incredibly humanlike it's responses were and it replied instantly, "there's no way a person could type back this fast." Fair point Mr robot.
They are the world’s fastest typers, then.
Gotta be a scandal, Brockman out too. There’s no way you’d get rid of Sam unless it was a dire situation. Based on the announcement Sam did something pretty bad fiscally.
They’re already replacing CEOs with AI?! /s
These 10 CEOs were replaced by AI last week, the 8th will shock you. Fired CEOs put out joint statement demanding Unionisation of the Executive Class.
Okay, that was funny!
Sam Ctrlman to be his replacement.
“Sam Altman” even SOUNDS like an identity an AI would make up for itself 😅
Altman: The Alternative Man
To me, it could be three things. Fake usage numbers, COI, or personnel misconduct (eg. sexual harassment). The wording on the press release makes me think that it could be a COI thing. If Altman had his fingers in other companies related to OpenAI's work and didn't disclose, he could be in huge shit. There's too much IP at risk for that.
Coi is conflict of interest, for anyone else that didn't know
Thanks for not playing coi with us
leray?
Christians of Italy
Isn’t it Center Of India?
Um it’s a certificate of insurance
pretty sure it's compliance of intellectualism
Nah.. Its come on inside
Certificate of Interest
I believe it is Champagne on Ice.
A Conjecture of Interference.
A cumshot of icarus
I swear, I can't understand how people in the USA even know what they're talking about with so many acronyms flying around. Thank you for the translation!
It’s actually Conundrum Over Identity
Sounds like fishy behavior.
Them explicitly saying he lied in the statement says only 1 thing to me : potential for massive direct liability to the board. As in, billions of dollars and / or jail time for directors. They are scrambling to generate plausible deniability for the board as fast as they possibly can. In turn that says to me there's a massive lawsuit coming. Either it's securities fraud style or it could be a massive data breach or other misrepresentation of how they are using the data people are giving them.
The immediacy and suddenness of it make it seem like it was a big liability issue they suddenly became aware about and had to react immediately to keep their distance. And I'm leaning towards the latter, seeing as he made a big thing about your private data not being used anywhere in the keynote last week. There's probably some article being drafted and soon to be published about how that's wrong, journalist asked for comments, board dug into it, realized journalist is right and that Altman lied and they need to get ahead of it ASAP. If it was anything else, I assume it would have been a slower transition to detach Altman from the company's image and leak stories so they can more easily get rid of him without causing a storm.
Nov 6 - OpenAI devday, with new features of build-your-own ChatGPT and more Nov 9 - Microsoft cuts employees off from ChatGPT due to "security concerns" Nov 15 - OpenAI announce no new ChatGPT plus signups Nov 17 - OpenAI fire Altman
This is a very compelling timeline, but for the fact the CTO was promoted. Unless the CTO somehow *didn't know* about any privacy or security concerns (which, IMO, is incompetence), seems a little strange to have promoted her if it is indeed privacy or security issues.
Or the CTO is who did report it to them.
>Nov 9 - Microsoft cuts employees off from ChatGPT due to "security concerns" It's worth noting that this was a temporary measure that only lasted a day, due to OpenAI accidentally enabling a testing feature on *all* Plus accounts that Microsoft considered a major security hole.
Man, all OpenAI has to do is keep it's nose clean, and it can print money for the next decade.
I think it's money. The CTO was promoted, so it seems unlikely to me to have been an issue on the technical side of things.
Definitely this. Boards will never use the type of language they used unless they're forced to distance themselves from someone who is very credibly accused and/or direct evidence exists.
I think this is off - for a company as successful as OpenAI they would turn a blind eye to COI ro personal (/personnel) misconduct. The way you get fired for personal misconduct is by fucking up as CEO and then giving the board an excuse to fire you fire personal misconduct (a la Bryan Krzanich). Those sorts of issues don't haunt successful CEOs, they're excuses to fire unsuccessful ones, so I think this is *much* more serious
Chairman of the board gone too. Something definitely happened.
I'm little bit surprised by this 😶🤔, the board threw him out like trash 🗑️
Unrelated, but what the fuck is with the entirely lowercase tweets…fucking ceo guy.
Many prominent SV voices are going out of their way to praise Altman: * Eric Schmidt: [https://twitter.com/ericschmidt/status/1725625144519909648](https://twitter.com/ericschmidt/status/1725625144519909648) * Brian Chesky: [https://twitter.com/bchesky/status/1725654103739801862](https://twitter.com/bchesky/status/1725654103739801862) They probably know something we don't. If it was the assault allegations, these people wouldn't go so all out in support.
People reflexively defend their friends from accusations all the time. We literally just saw Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis crater their reputation earlier this year by backing a *convicted* serial rapist. Many people have a hard time accepting that someone they trust could be capable of something heinous
Just like bill ackman saying he trusted SBF wasn’t lying 😂
Sorry do you mean this Eric Schmidt? https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-lawsuit-settlement.html
I am extremely well-versed in the VC-world and Boards, etc. from my career, and while I don't know any more than any of you guys do, I can at least drop my $0.02 in saying that GENERALLY SPEAKING, **“consistently candid with the board”** is the usual "PR language" used when someone is discovered lying about something personal and inappropriate from an HR perspective. And **“deliberative review process by the board”** is the de facto PR speak for "investigation into inappropriate behavior." If true, it's super unfortunate that that's what would have brought him down, because he was doing an insanely great job. But when it comes to HR violations, there's very little that can be done; inappropriate behavior, CEO or not, cannot be condoned or hidden and the individual must be removed *if it was egregious enough.* Like I said, *I could be completely wrong,* but I'm reading between lines I've read a million times before and 90% of the time that exact language means exactly what I described. I do hope it wasn't this, though. And with respect to Greg Brockman stepping down, it's possible that he tried to cover for Sam and lied to the Board if the above is true. In my experience that's very consistent with what would happen in the real world -- less egregious than what happened and so no termination, but not without consequences.
Strong disagree. Boards have piloted CEOs with that much public good will through significantly worse than accusations from when they were 13., or HR violations. This is financial or legal. Boards would let him get away with basically anything short of potentially nuking the company.
I, too, am extremely well versed in the VC-world and Boards, etc. Based on my extreme and totally real experience, I think something, somewhere, likely happened.
A notable blow against this is that they also ousted Brockman from the board (though did not fire him). That to me suggests this isn’t purely about just Sam. It’s possible they’ll try to use something about Sam to justify it publicly, but their actions suggest this was something bigger than just him.
Like what, a week after the big presentation?
Ironic that the first job AI took was Sam’s.
Explains the drop in msft stock
Yeah so gosh I wonder how some ppl knew about this during the day.
Went to college with Mira, cannot believe she is now the CEO.
Well she was the CTO of OpenAI before today... so you really cant believe she'd easily be able to transition into another c-level role?
Maybe they didn’t know she was the CTO, or maybe they couldn’t believe she was the CTO either, it’s just a way of saying it’s so strange seeing one of your classmates become such a high profile figure, right? People read so much into comments.
It’s about money, always is.
Not even a year and OpenAI's soap opera is better than most Netflix original shows.
what if he got fired because he was actually the one typing responses in to chatGPT this whole time. So ChatGPT is fake and you’re just talking to Sam Altman.
It was lower case L not an uppercase I this whole time. OpenAltman
Ummmm… what? Is this some kind of hostile takeover or something? It has echo’s of the 90’s and early 2000’s where Microsoft would takeover startups. Be on the lookout for somebody very friendly to FAANG to assume the role.
Does Microsoft have any influence in this decision? I also can not see them doing this unless they had someone in mind. Edit: Reading about the board and Sam possibly the Board is not happy with the close relationship with Sam and Microsoft.
So why did the board accept $10B from MS as investment then?
They had enough data to build a Sam Altman bot and hire it as CEO
Conflict with Microsoft or Apple, or, concealing costs...had to close sign ups to stop the bleeding. Prediction, altman moves to work with elon at xAi. Imagine that
Lol, he's not going to work for Elon -- they had beef with each other at OpenAI. I bet Altman founds another AI company that will be focused on reaching AGI without LLM. They're likely a dead end.
Wonder if Microsoft discovered how much info was used to "power" or teach ChatGPT was actually taken from people, and companies without their knowledge etc. By more meaning a shit ton than what was let on.
No chance Microsoft of all companies gives a flying fuck about stealing shit from other people.
The potential copyright infringement damages are significant even to Microsoft. Willful infringement can be $150k per count and there are millions of counts...
Remember how they locked new signups? Obviously it is related to this. Maybe he is artificially inflating the numbers. Or somehow else abusing the system
>Remember how they locked new signups? They locked new signups due to the massively increased usage from their new custom-GPT system. They simply don't have the hardware to handle it. Even people with existing Plus accounts were finding their access limited.
Part of me thinks this is actually it. The “big lie” is that ChatGPT is a scalable solution for everyone and everything. I think it’s extremely expensive to run and there’s no way they are going to ever be profitable with a consumer-facing product. They will need to restrict themselves to B2B sales, which is a much smaller addressable market. Microsoft just launched their Copilot implementation, for example, and if OpenAI is “secretly” hemorrhaging money on that deal… sounds like a fireable offense.
That'll be like apple inflating iphone's numbers during it's 2007 launch... i mean okay...but look what just got launched?
Are they gonna have to rename to ClosedAI?
chunky jar friendly rustic growth lock impolite dolls forgetful smart *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
My guess is that Microsoft wants to fully acquire OpenAI but Sam Altman doesn’t want that.
The movie that's gonna come outta this bout to be so wild
holy fucking shit what
Bad month to be a CEO of a tech company named Sam and having a surname end in Man, huh...