Skip to content

[JS Required] The OpenAI Files Document Broken Promises, Safety Compromises, Conflicts of Interest, and Leadership Concerns

Technology
3 3 47
  • Major Areas of Concern:

    ::: spoiler Restructuring: Analysis of planned changes to the nonprofit's relationship with its for-profit subsidiary

    • OpenAI plans to remove limits on investor returns: OpenAI once capped investor profits at a maximum of 100x to ensure that, if the company succeeds in building AI capable of automating all human labor, the proceeds would go to humanity. They have now announced plans to remove that cap.
    • OpenAI portrays itself as preserving nonprofit control while potentially disempowering the nonprofit: OpenAI claims to have reversed course on a decision to abandon nonprofit control, but the details suggest that the nonprofit’s board would no longer have all the authority it would need to hold OpenAI accountable to its mission.
    • Investors pressured OpenAI to make structural changes: OpenAI has admitted that it is making these changes to appease investors who have made their funding conditional on structural reforms, including allowing unlimited returns—exactly the type of investor influence OpenAI’s original structure was designed to prevent.
      :::

    ::: spoiler CEO Integrity: Concerns regarding leadership practices and misleading representations from OpenAI CEO Sam Altman

    • Senior employees have attempted to remove Altman at each of the three major companies he has run: Senior employees at Altman’s first startup twice urged the board to remove him as CEO over “deceptive and chaotic” behavior, while at Y Combinator, he was forced out and accused of absenteeism and prioritizing personal enrichment.
    • Altman claimed ignorance of a scheme to coerce employees into ultra-restrictive NDAs: However, he signed documents giving OpenAI the authority to revoke employees’ vested equity if they didn’t sign the NDAs.
    • Altman repeatedly lied to board members: For example, Altman stated that the legal team had approved a safety process exemption when they had not, and he reported that one board member wanted another board member removed when that was not the case.
      :::

    ::: spoiler Transparency & Safety: Concerns regarding safety processes, transparency, and organizational culture at OpenAI

    • OpenAI coerced employees into signing highly restrictive NDAs threatening their vested equity: Former OpenAI employees faced highly restrictive non-disclosure and non-disparagement agreements that threatened the loss of all vested equity if they ever criticized the company, even after resigning.
    • OpenAI has rushed safety evaluation processes: OpenAI rushed safety evaluations of its AI models to meet product deadlines and significantly cut the time and resources dedicated to safety testing.
    • OpenAI insiders described a culture of recklessness and secrecy: OpenAI employees have accused the company of not living up to its commitments and systematically discouraging employees from raising concerns.
      :::

    ::: spoiler Conflicts of Interest: Documenting potential conflicts of interest of OpenAI board members

    • OpenAI’s nonprofit board has multiple seemingly unaddressed conflicts of interest: While OpenAI defines ‘independent’ directors as those without OpenAI equity, the board appears to overlook conflicts from members' external investments in companies that benefit from OpenAI partnerships.
    • CEO Sam Altman downplayed his financial interest in OpenAI: Despite once claiming to have no personal financial interest in OpenAI, much of Altman’s $1.6 billion net worth is spread across investments in OpenAI partners including Retro Biosciences and Rewind AI, which stand to benefit from the company’s continued growth.
    • No recusals announced for critical restructuring decision: Despite these conflicts, OpenAI has not announced any board recusals for the critical decision of whether they will restructure and remove profit caps, unlocking billions of dollars in new investment.
      :::
  • Major Areas of Concern:

    ::: spoiler Restructuring: Analysis of planned changes to the nonprofit's relationship with its for-profit subsidiary

    • OpenAI plans to remove limits on investor returns: OpenAI once capped investor profits at a maximum of 100x to ensure that, if the company succeeds in building AI capable of automating all human labor, the proceeds would go to humanity. They have now announced plans to remove that cap.
    • OpenAI portrays itself as preserving nonprofit control while potentially disempowering the nonprofit: OpenAI claims to have reversed course on a decision to abandon nonprofit control, but the details suggest that the nonprofit’s board would no longer have all the authority it would need to hold OpenAI accountable to its mission.
    • Investors pressured OpenAI to make structural changes: OpenAI has admitted that it is making these changes to appease investors who have made their funding conditional on structural reforms, including allowing unlimited returns—exactly the type of investor influence OpenAI’s original structure was designed to prevent.
      :::

    ::: spoiler CEO Integrity: Concerns regarding leadership practices and misleading representations from OpenAI CEO Sam Altman

    • Senior employees have attempted to remove Altman at each of the three major companies he has run: Senior employees at Altman’s first startup twice urged the board to remove him as CEO over “deceptive and chaotic” behavior, while at Y Combinator, he was forced out and accused of absenteeism and prioritizing personal enrichment.
    • Altman claimed ignorance of a scheme to coerce employees into ultra-restrictive NDAs: However, he signed documents giving OpenAI the authority to revoke employees’ vested equity if they didn’t sign the NDAs.
    • Altman repeatedly lied to board members: For example, Altman stated that the legal team had approved a safety process exemption when they had not, and he reported that one board member wanted another board member removed when that was not the case.
      :::

    ::: spoiler Transparency & Safety: Concerns regarding safety processes, transparency, and organizational culture at OpenAI

    • OpenAI coerced employees into signing highly restrictive NDAs threatening their vested equity: Former OpenAI employees faced highly restrictive non-disclosure and non-disparagement agreements that threatened the loss of all vested equity if they ever criticized the company, even after resigning.
    • OpenAI has rushed safety evaluation processes: OpenAI rushed safety evaluations of its AI models to meet product deadlines and significantly cut the time and resources dedicated to safety testing.
    • OpenAI insiders described a culture of recklessness and secrecy: OpenAI employees have accused the company of not living up to its commitments and systematically discouraging employees from raising concerns.
      :::

    ::: spoiler Conflicts of Interest: Documenting potential conflicts of interest of OpenAI board members

    • OpenAI’s nonprofit board has multiple seemingly unaddressed conflicts of interest: While OpenAI defines ‘independent’ directors as those without OpenAI equity, the board appears to overlook conflicts from members' external investments in companies that benefit from OpenAI partnerships.
    • CEO Sam Altman downplayed his financial interest in OpenAI: Despite once claiming to have no personal financial interest in OpenAI, much of Altman’s $1.6 billion net worth is spread across investments in OpenAI partners including Retro Biosciences and Rewind AI, which stand to benefit from the company’s continued growth.
    • No recusals announced for critical restructuring decision: Despite these conflicts, OpenAI has not announced any board recusals for the critical decision of whether they will restructure and remove profit caps, unlocking billions of dollars in new investment.
      :::

    You’re telling me that Sam ConvenientLastname is a shitty person and the company they run is also a shitty thing? Say it ain’t so!!!

  • Major Areas of Concern:

    ::: spoiler Restructuring: Analysis of planned changes to the nonprofit's relationship with its for-profit subsidiary

    • OpenAI plans to remove limits on investor returns: OpenAI once capped investor profits at a maximum of 100x to ensure that, if the company succeeds in building AI capable of automating all human labor, the proceeds would go to humanity. They have now announced plans to remove that cap.
    • OpenAI portrays itself as preserving nonprofit control while potentially disempowering the nonprofit: OpenAI claims to have reversed course on a decision to abandon nonprofit control, but the details suggest that the nonprofit’s board would no longer have all the authority it would need to hold OpenAI accountable to its mission.
    • Investors pressured OpenAI to make structural changes: OpenAI has admitted that it is making these changes to appease investors who have made their funding conditional on structural reforms, including allowing unlimited returns—exactly the type of investor influence OpenAI’s original structure was designed to prevent.
      :::

    ::: spoiler CEO Integrity: Concerns regarding leadership practices and misleading representations from OpenAI CEO Sam Altman

    • Senior employees have attempted to remove Altman at each of the three major companies he has run: Senior employees at Altman’s first startup twice urged the board to remove him as CEO over “deceptive and chaotic” behavior, while at Y Combinator, he was forced out and accused of absenteeism and prioritizing personal enrichment.
    • Altman claimed ignorance of a scheme to coerce employees into ultra-restrictive NDAs: However, he signed documents giving OpenAI the authority to revoke employees’ vested equity if they didn’t sign the NDAs.
    • Altman repeatedly lied to board members: For example, Altman stated that the legal team had approved a safety process exemption when they had not, and he reported that one board member wanted another board member removed when that was not the case.
      :::

    ::: spoiler Transparency & Safety: Concerns regarding safety processes, transparency, and organizational culture at OpenAI

    • OpenAI coerced employees into signing highly restrictive NDAs threatening their vested equity: Former OpenAI employees faced highly restrictive non-disclosure and non-disparagement agreements that threatened the loss of all vested equity if they ever criticized the company, even after resigning.
    • OpenAI has rushed safety evaluation processes: OpenAI rushed safety evaluations of its AI models to meet product deadlines and significantly cut the time and resources dedicated to safety testing.
    • OpenAI insiders described a culture of recklessness and secrecy: OpenAI employees have accused the company of not living up to its commitments and systematically discouraging employees from raising concerns.
      :::

    ::: spoiler Conflicts of Interest: Documenting potential conflicts of interest of OpenAI board members

    • OpenAI’s nonprofit board has multiple seemingly unaddressed conflicts of interest: While OpenAI defines ‘independent’ directors as those without OpenAI equity, the board appears to overlook conflicts from members' external investments in companies that benefit from OpenAI partnerships.
    • CEO Sam Altman downplayed his financial interest in OpenAI: Despite once claiming to have no personal financial interest in OpenAI, much of Altman’s $1.6 billion net worth is spread across investments in OpenAI partners including Retro Biosciences and Rewind AI, which stand to benefit from the company’s continued growth.
    • No recusals announced for critical restructuring decision: Despite these conflicts, OpenAI has not announced any board recusals for the critical decision of whether they will restructure and remove profit caps, unlocking billions of dollars in new investment.
      :::

    There is nothing open about openai, and that was obvious way before they released chatgpt.

  • Government documents show police disabling AI oversight tools

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    210 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.worksV
    More machine than man? Because I'm pretty sure RoboCop didn't die to an even space wizard frying him with lightning while redeeming himself and saving his son. But I've never watched past RoboCop 2 so IDFK.
  • Writing is thinking

    Technology technology
    1
    20 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Amazon Doubles Prime Video Ads Per Hour

    Technology technology
    126
    1
    623 Stimmen
    126 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    V
    Me too, except I didn't get the email saying my pro vpn was about to expire, which might be my fault ofc. Gotta check the oarameters It's really good IMO and I'd recommend it fullheartedly, Switzerland has some of the best laws out there too concerning privacy too.
  • The Arc Browser Is Dead

    Technology technology
    88
    240 Stimmen
    88 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    P
    Haha, it's funny that you went that far. I think the reason why I notice it and you don't, is the 4k factor. My screen is 1920x1200 iirc.
  • 149 Stimmen
    33 Beiträge
    288 Aufrufe
    B
    That’s not the right analogy here. The better analogy would be something like: Your scary mafia-related neighbor shows up with a document saying your house belongs to his land. You said no way, you have connections with someone important that assured you your house is yours only and they’ll help you with another mafia if they want to invade your house. The whole neighborhood gets scared of an upcoming bloodbath that might drag everyone into it. But now your son says he actually agrees that your house belongs to your neighbor, and he’s likely waiting until you’re old enough to possibly give it up to him.
  • Stepping outside the algorithm

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    19 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Whatever happened to cheap eReaders? – Terence Eden’s Blog

    Technology technology
    72
    1
    126 Stimmen
    72 Beiträge
    787 Aufrufe
    T
    This is a weirdly aggressive take without considering variables. Almost petulant seeming. 6” readers are relatively cheap no matter the brand, but cost goes up with size. $250 to $300 is what a 7.8” or 8” reader costs, but there’s not a single one I know of at 6” at that price. There’s 10” and 13” models. Are you saying they should cost the same as a Kindle? Not to mention, regarding Kindle, Amazon spent years building the brand but selling either at cost or possibly even taking a loss on the devices as they make money on the book sales. Companies who can’t do that tend to charge more. Lastly, it’s not “feature creep” to improve the devices over time, many changes are quality of life. Larger displays for those that want them. Frontlit displays, and later the addition of warm lighting. Displays essentially doubled their resolution allowing for crisper fonts and custom fonts to render well. Higher contrast displays with darker blacks for text. More recently color displays as an option. This is all progress, but it’s not free. Also, inflation is a thing and generally happens at a rate of 2% to 3% annually or thereabouts during “normal” times, and we’ve hardly been living in normal times over the last decade and a half.
  • 24 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    35 Aufrufe
    toastedravioli@midwest.socialT
    Im all for making the traditional market more efficient and transparent, if blockchain can accommodate that, so long as we can also make crypto more like the traditional market. At least in terms of criminalizing shit that would obviously be illegal to do with securities