I’ve tried very hard to like him because like it or not, ChatGPT has revolutionized the AI industry but he’s so hypocritical I just can’t stand him.

Pretty common for dislikeable people to be the most successful at an endeavor. It's not a coincidence.

Sam Altman is responsible for leading the team that have revolutionised AI in its position within society.

There is plenty to criticise OpenAI for but what he and they have achieved is extraordinary, and there is no need for that sort of toxic personal attack.

It’s fine to feel the ends justify the means but not everyone believes that.

Sam is responsible for marketing the team which popularized a certain kind of AI product. No need for personal attack.

I can’t comment on his personality because I don’t know him. But it’s delusional to think the leadership’s personal qualities are irrelevant to developing AI. There’s going to be a lot of subjectivity in fine-tuning the answers.

Success invites haters.

In your world how would you consider Sam Altman having no equity in OpenAI? And everyone finding out after it had a viral hit

Probably no different given his involvement in worldcoin

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoi...

and loopt

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loopt

There is no way this guy hasn't figured out some way to get paid out of this.

We just haven't figured out how yet.

that just sounds ridiculous. Teams would have been over the legals for a $10bn investment. Not everyone is financially incentivised.

Also he's already half way to being a billionaire anyway without OpenAI.

> Not everyone is financially incentivised.

Dude, he is American.

Dude, he absolutely loves to talk about incentives.

Now that’s neither here nor there response to yours… but since he is so in tune with the concept of incentives, and likes to discuss them, it does make me curious what his incentives are that he is acting on.

Wonder if it's indirectly through some stake in Microsoft or whoever deals with them at that level.

I mean, Occam's Razor says if he wanted a way to get paid, he would just have equity or a very large salary, the normal things CEOs do when they want to make lots of money from their very profitable company.

He gained a huge amount of reputation by saying "I don't have equity in the company. I'm doing it because I love it" in front of the Congress. While he was demanding licensing for AI because it's too dangerous.

I love it. It's dangerous. Hypocrisy? No. It's the tendency of man to pursue what is harmful to himself. Even though optimistic technologists of HN won't agree, much of technology has not benefitted humanity.

Or maybe he just doesn't need more money and wants to do something cool? If my basic needs were met, I'd go volunteer at any number of non-profits full time.

I can't judge the individual, but his words do not align with the company's actions in the slightest.

>> 4. OpenAI will avoid competing with their customers — other than with ChatGPT

On this I would not bet a dime.

He didn't even pinky promise.

I know it doesn't seem related on the surface, but I've found all startup CEOs who ban remote work to be snake-like and dishonest. Interesting coincidence at least.

Might it be that because they know that their own morals and ethics are so fluid that they therefore think than everyone else is the same and thus has to be surveilled to be sure to have "performance...? Just a thought....

So let me make an guess, you like remote work?