If you ever needed a lesson in the difference between power and authority, this is a good one.

The leaders of this coup read the rules and saw that they could use the board to remove Altman, they had the authority to make the move and “win” the game.

It seems that they, like many fools mistook authority for power. The “rules” said they could do it! Alas they did not have the power to execute the coup. All the rules in the world cannot make the organization follow you.

Power comes from people who grant it to you. Authority comes from paper. Authority is the guidelines for the use of power, without power, it is pointless.

It’s rather interesting here that the board, consisting of a fairly strong scientific presence, and not so much a commercial one, is getting such hate.

People are quick to jump on for profit companies that do everything in their power to earn a buck. Well, here you have a company that fires their CEO for going too much in the direction of earning money.

Yet every one is all up in arms over it. We can’t have the cake and eat it folks.

I'd like to know why exactly the board fired Altman before I pass judgment one way or the other, especially given the mad rush by the investor class to re-instate him. It makes me especially curious that the employees are sticking up for him. My initial intuition was that MSFT convinced Altman to cross bridges that he shouldn't have (for $$$$), but I doubt that a little more now that the employees are sticking up for him. Something fucking weird is going on, and I'm dying to know what it is.

You're not going to develop AI for the benefit of humanity at Microsoft. If they go there, we'll know "Open"AI's mission was all a lie.

It's supposed to be a nonprofit benefiting humanity, not a pay day for owners or workers. The board isn't making money off of it.

Giving microsoft control is a bad idea. (duh?)

Giving a single person control is a bad idea, per sam altman.

You also informed the leadership team that allowing the company to be destroyed "would be consistent with the mission."

You are God damned right that shutting everything down is one of the roles of a non-profit Board focused on AI safety.

Later: All 195 employees of OpenAI in support of board of directors.

The biopic on this whole thing is going to be hilarious. The rumors are that the board didn’t like how fast the CEO is moving with AI and they’re afraid of consequences of possible AGI (which I don’t think these new LLMs are even close to) but that doesn’t feel like what modern boards of directors are so I don’t trust it.

It’s just baffling how this golden goose was half way strangled in the nest.

Muuuhahahaha.... What a shitshow this organisation has become.

I feel like this is Satya's wet dream. He woke up on Friday like normal and went to bed on Sunday owning what, 85% of OpenAI's top people? Acquisitions aren't usually that easy.

It seems obvious Sam would want to grow his company to infinity. That's what VC people do. The board expecting otherwise is strange in hindsight. Now they can oversee the slow, measured adoption of much smaller business while the rest of the team shoots for the stars.

Anyways, RIP y'all. Skynet launches next year.

Image Text:

To the Board of Directors at OpenAl,

OpenAl is the world's leading Al company. We, the employees of OpenAl, have developed the best models and pushed the field to new frontiers. Our work on Al safety and governance shapes global norms. The products we built are used by millions of people around the world. Until now, the company we work for and cherish has never been in a stronger position.

The process through which you terminated Sam Altman and removed Greg Brockman from the board has jeopardized all of this work and undermined our mission and company. Your conduct has made it clear you did not have the competence to oversee OpenAl.

When we all unexpectedly learned of your decision, the leadership team of OpenAl acted swiftly to stabilize the company. They carefully listened to your concerns and tried to cooperate with you on all grounds. Despite many requests for specific facts for your allegations, you have never provided any written evidence. They also increasingly realized you were not capable of carrying out your duties, and were negotiating in bad faith.

The leadership team suggested that the most stabilizing path forward - the one that would best serve our mission, company, stakeholders, employees and the public - would be for you to resign and put in place a qualified board that could lead the company forward in stability. Leadership worked with you around the clock to find a mutually agreeable outcome. Yet within two days of your initial decision, you again replaced interim CEO Mira Murati against the best interests of the company. You also informed the leadership team that allowing the company to be destroyed "would be consistent with the mission."

Your actions have made it obvious that you are incapable of overseeing OpenAl. We are unable to work for or with people that lack competence, judgement and care for our mission and employees. We, the undersigned, may choose to resign from OpenAl and join the newly announced Microsoft subsidiary run by Sam Altman and Greg Brockman. Microsoft has assured us that there are positions for all OpenAl employees at this new subsidiary should we choose to join. We will take this step imminently, unless all current board members resign, and the board appoints two new lead independent directors, such as Bret Taylor and Will Hurd, and reinstates Sam Altman and Greg Brockman.

1. Mira Murati
2. Brad Lightcap
3. Jason Kwon
4. Wojciech Zaremba
5. Alec Radford
6. Anna Makanju
7. Bob McGrew
8. Srinivas Narayanan
9. Che Chang
10. Lillian Weng
11. Mark Chen
12. Ilya Sutskever

We, the undersigned, may choose to resign from OpenAl and join the newly announced Microsoft subsidiary run by Sam Altman and Greg Brockman.

Let's have all OpenAI employees move to Microsoft. What could possibly go wrong?

Ain't that simply a curtain drama for practical acquisition of OpenAI by Microsoft, circumventing potential legal issues?

This started months ago.

This whole situation happened so fast and it confuses me

I don’t know enough about why the board did this, or what Altman was up to, to form a meaningful opinion about what happened. However, I do know that anything that empowers Microsoft in this industry is a bad thing. Microsoft is a bad actor in every regard and will always behave in ways that ultimately produce worse products than we would get otherwise. Given the potential implications of these technologies, and all the reasons to not trust Microsoft to protect public interests, this news is terrible.