It means that OpenAIs public commitments to allocate resources for safety research do not track with what they actually do and people who were hired to work on safety (or in schulmans case choose to focus on safety) don't like it, so they leave.

It may mean what it says. Alignment may not be seen as as important as building larger and more capable models so may not be receiving the resources or attention he wants. Doesn't have to be as dramatic as military applications or neutering models.

AI alignment has a well defined meaning. You can look at the wikipedia article if you wish. If you dismiss it as an important problem, that's fine but it's pretty clear what AI alignment means in this context.

I think you misunderstood the point. There's a specific thing regarding alignment that Schulman and OpenAI disagree on, and that thing is not revealed to us. There are countless possibilities, but we are left in the dark.

For example, his focus on alignment could be more about preventing the end of human civilization, while Microsoft/OpenAI's focus could be more about not expressing naughty opinions that advertisers dislike.