They weren't willing to gut the company. That's why Sam is back as CEO.

It sounded like they would if they could (for instance trying to sell to Anthropic or instating a "slow it way down" CEO), but they even failed at that. Not an effective board at all.

>for instance trying to sell to Anthropic or instating a "slow it way down" CEO

I wouldn't put these in the same category as "90% of staff leaves for Microsoft".

In any case, let's not confuse unsuccessful with incompetent. (Or incompetent with immoral, for that matter.)

They were willing but failed, and mostly on account of not doing enough prepwork.

It's remarkable that the old board is the side characterized as willing to blow up the company, since it was Altman's side who threatened to blow it up. All the old board really did was fire Altman and remove Brockman from the board.

Exactly. It sounds like those board members themselves were acting in the interest of profit instead of the "benefit all humanity" mission stuff, no different than Altman. If anything then, the only difference between the two groups is one of time horizon. Altman wants to make money from the technology now. The board wants to wait until it's advanced enough to take over the world, and then take over the world with it. For the world's benefit, of course.