News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by whywhywhywhy on Monday November 20, 2023 @09:10PM (#38358017)
>Have these people never worked at any other company before?

Half the board has not had a real job ever. I’m serious.

Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by squigz on Tuesday November 21, 2023 @12:14AM (#38359612)
Could you please elaborate on what a 'real job' is in this context?
Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by TrackerFF on Tuesday November 21, 2023 @04:38AM (#38361472)
I'm going to assume that he's referring to Tasha and Helen.

I don't know if that is accurate, or even fair - the only thing I can see, is that there's very little open information regarding them.

From the little I can find, Tasha seems to have worked at NASA Research Park, as well as having been CEO for startup called Geo Sim Cities. Stanford and CMU alumni? While other websites say Bard college and University of Southern California.

As for Helen, she seems to have worked as a researcher in both academia and Open Philanthropy.

Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by GreedClarifies on Monday November 20, 2023 @11:44PM (#38359366)
It is unbelievable TBH.

Shocking. Simply shocking.

Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by adastra22 on Monday November 20, 2023 @11:10PM (#38359084)
And the one which does have a real job is a direct competitor with OpenAI.
Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by ilikehurdles on Tuesday November 21, 2023 @12:42AM (#38359824)
And since none of them have equity in OpenAI, their external financial interest would influence decision making, especially when those interests lie with a competing company where a board member is currently the chief executive.

I've seen too much automatic praise given to this board under the unbacked assumption that this decision was some pure, mission-driven action, and not enough criticism of an org structure that allows a board to bet against the long term success of the underlying organization.