Sam Altman Is Reinstated as OpenAI’s Chief Executive::The move capped a chaotic five days at the artificial intelligence company.

  • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is he also still at Microsoft? Is this that overemployment everyone was talking about last week?

    • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      One of the articles yesterday stated he wasn’t at Microsoft yet. The MS CEO said he could either be reinstated or start an AI initiative at MS

      Apparently he’s a big part of why MS bought 49% of OpenAI

    • Tyfud@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 year ago

      TL;DR; The board basically caved to the demands of the 500+ employees that penned and signed a letter telling them to reinstate Sam Altman and disband the current board.

      In addition to reinstating him, most of the board is “quitting”.

      In this case, the employees won out.

        • Tyfud@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          As others have replied, the MS thing is about them having a Plan B in case the board didn’t reinstate him.

          One way or another he’s working for Microsoft here at the end of the day, Microsoft is just making sure they keep him gainfully employed within their control. Their move to hire him was covering their bases.

          If the board were to reinstate him, like it has, then MS can rescind their offer and allow him to join the Open AI CEO position again.

          Either way, MS didn’t want to lose Sam is all this says.

        • Gregorech@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Microsoft owns a major share, not to be confused with a majority share, of the stock, he is going to work for them.

        • TheColonel@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          That was more “on the table” if he wasn’t reinstated.

          I also suspect there were some inaccuracies in the reporting and headlines around that.

    • GingaNinga@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      same, didn’t all this drama just happen yesterday? We’ll have to wait a few months for the doc/drama to come out.

  • Daniel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    This entire thing is super confusing… and, I might have missed a lot of things, but it kinda seems to be the board was right? They seemed inexperienced, but they still seemed to be capable of working in the best interest of the company’s vision (and doing so).

    Anyway, please fill me in if I’ve missed something crucial.

      • DreamButt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is lemmy so people are going to side with the non-profit side of things here

        The best I can understand of the situation is that Sam and lots of the rest of the employees were generally trying to move toward a for-profit model. The board didn’t like this and fired him which is within their power. So if you don’t like a for-profit Open AI then you’ll generally side with the board on this one. (Part of the boards “job” is ensuring that AGI is developed for the benefit of all of humanity. This isn’t an exaggeration it’s literally outlined in their list of duties)

        If you only look at how wishy washy the board has been then they look like big dumb dumbs. But given how many employees walked out they had no choice but to try and get him back. At this point many people are expecting the board to resign in full and a new board to be instated but we’ll just have to wait and see

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sam Altman was already CEO of the for-profit arm of OpenAI. The non-profit arm, OpenAI, Inc. had a controlling 51% of shares. So I’m not sure what you mean when you say:

          Sam and lots of the rest of the employees were generally trying to move toward a for-profit model.

          They were already a for-profit company. What we saw this week is that the non-profit board may have had a 51% controlling share in the stock, but that’s the only control they had, and it was totally on paper. Without the employees of their for-profit arm, and apparently without Altman, the non-profit arm has exactly jack shit, as the entire world now plainly sees.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Satya Nadella, Microsoft’s chief executive, said on X that he was “encouraged by the changes to OpenAI board,” calling it a “first essential step on a path to more stable, well-informed, and effective governance.”

    A person close to the board’s deliberations on Tuesday said that Mr. D’Angelo, Tasha McCauley and Helen Toner pressed for certain concessions from Mr. Altman, including an independent investigation into his leadership of OpenAI.

    The ouster kicked off efforts by Mr. Altman, 38, his allies in the tech industry and OpenAI’s employees to force the company’s board to bring him back.

    But in a head-spinning development just hours later, Microsoft said that Mr. Altman, Mr. Brockman and others would be joining the company to start a new advanced artificial intelligence lab.

    Most of OpenAI’s more than 700 employees signed a letter telling the board they would walk out and follow Mr. Altman to Microsoft if he wasn’t reinstated, putting the future of the start-up in jeopardy.

    Four board members — Ilya Sutskever, an OpenAI founder; Mr. D’Angelo; Ms. Toner, a director of strategy at Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology; and Ms. McCauley, an entrepreneur and computer scientist — had initially decided to push Mr. Altman out.


    The original article contains 856 words, the summary contains 202 words. Saved 76%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!