I don't think this follows. One thing that did not happen was the board saying anything like "This is an AI safety decision; we're hitting the big red 'stop' button." If they had said anything like that, I think the current situation would look a lot different.
Instead, the secrecy, surprise, unconvincing justifications, attempts to walk …
I don't think this follows. One thing that did not happen was the board saying anything like "This is an AI safety decision; we're hitting the big red 'stop' button." If they had said anything like that, I think the current situation would look a lot different.
Instead, the secrecy, surprise, unconvincing justifications, attempts to walk it back, and resignation talk make me think that the board was not competent to even run a gaming guild. (Seriously, I've seen stuff like this happen.) I'm sure the board members are fine people otherwise, but sometimes good, thoughtful nerds, when placed in positions of responsibility, can get their heads so far up their asses (i.e., hyperfocus) that they lose sight of ground truth. (And here I'm speaking of myself, in a different situation, as a director of a 501(c)(3).) The rapid hiring of Altman (or his founding of a competitor), and the mass revolt of employees, should have been predictable consequences of their actions, if the board had any situational awareness. The failure to articulate a convincing reason for their actions was simple incompetence.
This isn't a judgement on the directors' "value" as human beings. Not everyone is cut out to be a director, or a CEO, or a startup founder. And sometimes we only find out when we try and fail. That's life. (Or perhaps, of course, in this case, apocalypse.)
I don't think this follows. One thing that did not happen was the board saying anything like "This is an AI safety decision; we're hitting the big red 'stop' button." If they had said anything like that, I think the current situation would look a lot different.
Instead, the secrecy, surprise, unconvincing justifications, attempts to walk it back, and resignation talk make me think that the board was not competent to even run a gaming guild. (Seriously, I've seen stuff like this happen.) I'm sure the board members are fine people otherwise, but sometimes good, thoughtful nerds, when placed in positions of responsibility, can get their heads so far up their asses (i.e., hyperfocus) that they lose sight of ground truth. (And here I'm speaking of myself, in a different situation, as a director of a 501(c)(3).) The rapid hiring of Altman (or his founding of a competitor), and the mass revolt of employees, should have been predictable consequences of their actions, if the board had any situational awareness. The failure to articulate a convincing reason for their actions was simple incompetence.
This isn't a judgement on the directors' "value" as human beings. Not everyone is cut out to be a director, or a CEO, or a startup founder. And sometimes we only find out when we try and fail. That's life. (Or perhaps, of course, in this case, apocalypse.)