Mark my words, this was a hostile poaching operation by Microsoft. Like 65% convinced this was the case. We won’t know until 10 years have passed and some dumb emails end up in discovery on some unrelated lawsuit.
Sam wants to push for more & quicker profit with MS and VC backing, but board resists, constant conflicts
Sam aligns with MS, hatch a plan on how to gut OpenAI for its know-how, ppl, and tech, leaving the non-profit part bleeding out in the gutter
Sam & MS set a trap: Sam crosses some red lines, maybe taking commercial decisions without board approval. Potentially there was also some whispering in key ears (e.g, Ilya) by seemingly helpful advisors/VCs to push & pull at the same time on both sides
Board has enough after Sam doesn’t back down, fires him & other co-founder guy
MS and VCs go full attack to discredit board. After some info gathering, they realize they have been utterly fucked
Some chaos, quick decision of appointing/replacing ppl, trying to manage the fire, even talking to Sam (btw this might have been a fallback option for MS, that the board reinstates him with more control and guardrails, weakening the power of the non-profit)
Sam joins MS, masks are off
Employees on the sinking ship revolt, even Ilya realizes he was manipulated/fucked
OpenAI dead, key ppl join MS, tech and rest of the company bought for scraps. Non-profit part dead. Capitalist victory
Source: subjective interpretation/deduction based on the available info and my experience working as a management consultant for 10 years (dealing with lot of exec politics, though nothing this serious)
“Least said, soonest mended,” as the saying goes: if you want the cleanest break possible, say as little as possible. It’s probably also why the board fired him via a virtual meeting after close of business on a Friday.
By stark contrast, both Altman and Brockman were on Twitter almost immediately thereafter, joined shortly by armies of supporters, making absolutely sure that everything happening over the weekend was as public as possible, almost play by play, and was also openly joined in the constant public commentary by the CEO of Microsoft, who became Altman’s employer less than 48 hours later.
Note that I’m not saying it’s wrong. But in regard to point #3 made above by @[email protected] it all seems almost planned, especially when you throw in this tidbit from The Guardian:
Sam Altman, the recently sacked boss of OpenAI, the company behind the ChatGPT bot, was telling investors he planned to launch a new company before his shock departure, it was claimed.
No other info, but IF it’s true AND Altman was openly talking about planning a competitive service, then it does lend credence to the thought that Altman wanted to go, and to leave in such a way that he got to take whoever he wanted with him, because that is the kind of shit that gets you fired from your own board.
Mark my words, this was a hostile poaching operation by Microsoft. Like 65% convinced this was the case. We won’t know until 10 years have passed and some dumb emails end up in discovery on some unrelated lawsuit.
Source: subjective interpretation/deduction based on the available info and my experience working as a management consultant for 10 years (dealing with lot of exec politics, though nothing this serious)
Wow, that’s exactly my thoughts. Thanks for posting and taking the time.
But then why wouldn’t the board say exactly why Altman was removed?
“Least said, soonest mended,” as the saying goes: if you want the cleanest break possible, say as little as possible. It’s probably also why the board fired him via a virtual meeting after close of business on a Friday.
By stark contrast, both Altman and Brockman were on Twitter almost immediately thereafter, joined shortly by armies of supporters, making absolutely sure that everything happening over the weekend was as public as possible, almost play by play, and was also openly joined in the constant public commentary by the CEO of Microsoft, who became Altman’s employer less than 48 hours later.
Note that I’m not saying it’s wrong. But in regard to point #3 made above by @[email protected] it all seems almost planned, especially when you throw in this tidbit from The Guardian:
Sam Altman ‘was working on new venture’ before sacking from OpenAI
No other info, but IF it’s true AND Altman was openly talking about planning a competitive service, then it does lend credence to the thought that Altman wanted to go, and to leave in such a way that he got to take whoever he wanted with him, because that is the kind of shit that gets you fired from your own board.