Before Altman’s ouster, OpenAI’s board was divided and feuding

Re:Before Altman’s ouster, OpenAI’s board was divided and fe... by comp_throw7 on Tuesday November 21, 2023 @09:26PM (#38373866)

This is exactly backwards. The reason we create organizations like this is not for the benefit of the organization itself, but to accomplish specific goals. Those goals are outlined in the charter. If the organization starts doing things that conflict with the charter, the responsibility of the board is to course-correct.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Before Altman’s ouster, OpenAI’s board was divided and fe... by Aunche on Tuesday November 21, 2023 @09:40PM (#38374004)

The place to course correct is from the board room, not in public. If she had enough power to oust the CEO, she should have enough power to pressure him to make changes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Before Altman’s ouster, OpenAI’s board was divided and fe... by comp_throw7 on Tuesday November 21, 2023 @09:44PM (#38374036)

The board can't compel the CEO to do specific things, only replace them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Before Altman’s ouster, OpenAI’s board was divided and fe... by Aunche on Tuesday November 21, 2023 @09:54PM (#38374136)

Of course they can. If Sam Altman is really as heedless about AI safety as the board seems to think, GTP wouldn't be so aggressively aligned.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Before Altman’s ouster, OpenAI’s board was divided and fe... by 0xDEAFBEAD on Tuesday November 21, 2023 @10:26PM (#38374389)

A misaligned AI could act aligned in the service of its interests, just like an employee trying to steal from a company would act like a good honest employee. Methods for getting AIs to visibly act a certain way aren't necessarily sufficient to control advanced AI systems.

[ Parent | on HN ]