Yeah but the CTO is now interim CEO. Hard to imagine her getting the role if that was the case.

"Interim CEO", she may also be marked for termination too.

If she was under investigation, the board would almost certainly bypass her for the interim CEO position, to mitigate the disruption if that investigation also turned out negative. (They might make her CEO after she was cleared, though, if it went the other way.)

Random question: do you have any connection to the Dragon speech-to-text software [0] that was first released in 1997? I've always found that to be an intriguing example of software that was "ahead of its time" (along with "the mother of all demos" [1]). And if so, it's funny to see you replying to the account named after (a typo of) ChatGPT.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_NaturallySpeaking

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos

If you hunt 2 mosquitoes in your room, do you go to bed after having swatted 1? Certainly not me.

If I haven't found it after thirty seconds, I put on a long sleeve shirt and open the door...

I usually just cover myself with a sheet, say a hail mary and get back to sleep.

I ain't no Captain Ahab baby.

Unless she was the one who blew the whistle on him. Here's a hypothetical scenario:

- New feature/product/etc. launch is planned.

- Murati warns Altman that it's not ready yet and there are still security and privacy issues that need to be worked out.

- Altman ignores her warnings, launches anyway.

- Murati blows the whistle on him to the board, tells them that he ordered the launch over her objections.

- Data breach happens. Altman attempts to cover it up. Murati blows the whistle again.

- Board fires Altman, gives Murati the job as it's clear from her whistleblowing that she has the ethics for it at least.

Again, completely hypothetical scenario, but it's one possible explanation for how this could happen.

or it's the other way around. she wants to launch because money and investors and that's all that she's really about.

he says fuck them and their money, it's not ready yet, here's a bunch of other things that will make people go wooooow.

she's not happy he does that because future. convinces the board of money and investors.

the board shits on humanity and goes for money and investors.

“Do a hugely public firing because a feature wasn’t launched” would probably be a first

I'm betting that ridiculous offer they made last week to cover developer legal fees has already blown up in their face

"they lied about how they are using customer data" -- possibly. it is in the inherent logic of the ai to gobble up as much data as physically possible

Zero percent chance that Ilya (part of the board) would be blindsided by this.

things are moving faster than the ability of any human to keep up.

This is the most plausible speculation I've read here, really.

> covered up a massive data breach or something similar to that

Honest question: do execs or companies in general ever suffer consequences for data breaches? Seems like basically no one cares about this stuff.

Clorox just fired their CISO last week for a data breach

Isn't that what ciso roles are for? They aren't real c-suite roles are they?

A CISO's role is to get fired after a data breach

No, their role is to prevent a data breach from happening in the first place.

Chief Information Scapegoat Officer

Really different between private and public companies. Recent hilarious piece from Matt Levine that was discussed on HN: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-11-16/hacker...

I think it depends on whose data was revealed, and the nature of the data.

Most executives are covered by Errors and Omissions insurance which protects them from personal liability.

I bet the data breach being covered up is not customer data, but IP. My #2 theory is that the breach is prompt data and it went to a nation-state adversary of the US. Plenty of people putting sensitive work info into ChatGPT when they shouldn’t.

It might be related to this: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/09/microsoft-restricts-employee...

Microsoft had inside information about their security, which is why they restricted access. Meanwhile, every other enterprise and gov organisation using ChatGPT is exposed.

Is Microsoft fully indemnified if they discovered an OpenAI leak, but kept it to themselves?