In perhaps essentially the most unexpected tech news of the yr, billionaire and AI evangelist Sam Altman has been ejected from his CEO role at OpenAI by the corporate’s board after an apparent vote of no confidence. Its exact wording in a release issued this afternoon: Altman’s “departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities.”
What the hell is going on at essentially the most hyped company on the planet?! Listed below are some totally speculative theories that occurred to us and others around the online.
1. Did Altman circumvent the board in a significant deal?
Based on the board’s language and the way in which these giant tech corporations work, that is the prevailing theory floating around immediately. “Not consistently candid” is a really diplomatic way of claiming Altman lied.
It’s possible that Altman — and potentially OpenAI President Greg Brockman, who stepped down as chairman concurrently, then resigned — desired to make a daring move that he knew the board wouldn’t like. It’s not unusual for these deals to be hammered out quietly in smoke- (or vape-) filled rooms after which presented as a , but when it was controversial enough and the board discovered about these maneuvers, it might be fuel for an ouster.
But what sort of deal can be big and dangerous enough for a summary dismissal of the CEO and famous face of the corporate? The person was onstage two weeks ago; I just talked with him! What could have happened since then?
Few can be shocked if Microsoft, which is deeply, deeply embedded in OpenAI as an investor and customer, is an element here. Could Altman have been working with — or against — OpenAI’s patron in secret? If Altman desired to kill the golden goose by going independent, that may need activated the board’s fiduciary or otherwise statutory duty. Then again, if he was negotiating another deal, like an acquisition or deeper and more exclusive integration, it could even have caused the board to bristle, either at the thought itself or at being excluded.
But when Microsoft was as shocked as the remainder of us, as one report has it, it could hardly be the sort of high-stakes conspiracy some appear to be hoping for. But one must assume that Microsoft would say that either way. Even in the event that they’d been working with Altman on some sort of secret plan, they will truthfully say they were surprised by his firing. (And so they “remain committed to our partnership.”)
2. Do they disagree on long-term strategy?
Despite being the most popular tech company on the planet immediately and everybody talking about ChatGPT, OpenAI isn’t exactly a sound business. It’s shoveling money into the furnace as fast as it might probably by serving, by all accounts, a fantastically expensive product at bargain-bin prices.
That’s all well and good for a yr or two, but sooner or later that strategy changes from a growth hack to an existential liability. Could Altman and the board have had irreconcilable differences on where that time lies?
This doesn’t seem so likely. The corporate has been very deliberately pursuing this very publicly, confidently and on a long-term basis. Altman and the board appear to be in sync on this, a minimum of for the current.
3. Do the numbers not add up?
Then again, could OpenAI be losing even money than Altman admitted or projected? It seems inconceivable, but the prices of running this operation haven’t any precedent, nor really does the operation itself.
Or what if, and again this is only speculation, Altman has been secretly pursuing an internal project, perhaps at significant cost, against the recommendation of the board and without the needed safety measures that probably should accompany such research? It sounds a bit of wild, but firing your CEO like this can also be a bit of wild.
Some sort of major mismatch within the financial department might be cause for dismissal, but it surely’s hard to assume what Altman could have kept from the board CTO that may be so damning.
There’s also the chance that Altman was making personal investments in a way that the board disagreed with. With OpenAI poised to be a kingmaker in the sphere, he would definitely be ready of power. One would think that, as an ideologically driven person already wealthy beyond belief and at the pinnacle of the world’s leading AI company, Altman would have risen beyond having to do this type of side deal, or on the very least that scrutiny on him and people near him would prevent them. But one can never make sure.
4. Could it’s a significant security or privacy incident?
The concept that the corporate has experienced a significant, perhaps pervasive, security issue is bolstered by the undeniable fact that Microsoft reportedly suspended use of ChatGPT internally just a few days ago. OpenAI subsequently stopped allowing recent signups. If there was a serious security problem in its biggest product and Altman downplayed it, that may obviously create distrust with the board.
There may be also the potential for misuse at scale with the large amount of non-public data that travels through OpenAI’s APIs and services.
Working against this theory is the undeniable fact that CTO Mira Murati was just elevated to interim CEO in Altman’s place. It seems unlikely that anything security-related would undergo the CEO and never the CTO, or that the 2 can be at odds to the purpose where one might be fired like this and the opposite swapped in to scrub up the mess. Because the board’s statement notes, Murati is answerable for product and safety, amongst other things. Any significant snafu in that department would reflect on her, in addition to Altman.
5. Perhaps a difference of AI ethics or philosophy?
Altman is a proud techno-optimist, and infrequently speaks fondly of the chances of AGI, or artificial general intelligence, a theoretical software system that achieves human-like intellect and flexibility.
The board’s statement pointedly includes that “OpenAI was deliberately structured to advance our mission: to be certain that artificial general intelligence advantages all humanity” and that recent leadership was needed. It’s possible that Sam’s zeal for AGI, even absent a secret project or agreement, led to a significant rift between him and the board.
It’s been obvious to all that Altman took the corporate in a rather more corporate direction from its origins, changing its legal status and aggressively pursuing enterprise and consumer applications. That doesn’t sound lots just like the “mission” the board desires to advance. Nonetheless, this shift didn’t occur today, and it definitely doesn’t appear to be a plausible reason for abruptly firing the CEO and just a few others on an attractive fall Friday afternoon.
6. What about IP and legal liability?
Altman told me at OpenAI’s Dev Day earlier this month that the corporate doesn’t wish to incur any copyright problems through the use of (as I had asked about) datasets of pirated books. But plenty of research I’ve been reading contradicts that, as does just about every AI data scientist I check with. It’s exceedingly hard to assume that OpenAI built GPT-3 with the copyrighted books database (as appears to be the case) but not GPT-4 or succeeding models. (I used to be going to write down this up next week, so thanks OpenAI board for eating my lunch.)
In the event you were the board and facing the mounting accusations that your product was built on a dataset that features hundreds or hundreds of thousands of copyrighted works — and your CEO had systematically downplayed the potential liability there — how would you are feeling? I’d feel very hurt.
But again, if copyright liability was the rationale, it seems unlikely that the board would promote the CTO. Presumably, OpenAI’s Chief Science Officer Ilya Sutskever would even have been within the know, and he’s still on the board.
7. Did CTO Mira Murati launch a coup?
Probably not — she seems cool, and anyway what CTO desires to be CEO? Mira, answer my email!
8. Was it a “personal matter”?
When someone is kicked out in a rush, it’s not unusual that there was some sort of unprofessional behavior within the workplace. Some CEOs get a pass on things like having kids with direct reports, but not all.
Altman also has three siblings, and his younger sister Annie has publicly accused him of abuse. We now have no way of evaluating these allegations, which involve private matters.
Our read on the board’s language in dismissing Altman, nonetheless, is that it was not a legal or personal problem that provoked the motion, but an expert or business one.
We probably won’t know the total truth on this for a very long time, because the characters within the drama are prone to be NDA’ed up. Per various whispers and leaks, an all-hands meeting in regards to the situation this afternoon didn’t produce any revelations beyond banal reassurances that the corporate is wonderful and so they’ll get a fresh CEO soon. Expect to listen to plenty of rumors before we hear the actual thing.
