Skip to content

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

Technology
3 3 20
  • 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.

  • 30 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    27 Aufrufe
    I
    That is a drive unit. The robot is bending down next to it wearing a vest.
  • 455 Stimmen
    149 Beiträge
    85 Aufrufe
    eyekaytee@aussie.zoneE
    They will say something like solar went from 600gw to 1000 thats a 66% increase this year and coal only increased 40% except coal is 3600gw to 6400. Hrmmmm, maybe these numbers are outdated? Based on this coal and gas are down: In Q1 2025, solar generation rose 48% compared to the same period in 2024. Solar power reached 254 TWh, making up 10% of total electricity. This was the largest increase among all clean energy sources. Coal-fired electricity dropped by 4%, falling to 1,421 TWh. Gas-fired power also went down by 4%, reaching 67 TWh https://carboncredits.com/china-sets-clean-energy-record-in-early-2025-with-951-tw/ are no where close to what is required to meet their climate goals Which ones in particular are you talking about? Trump signs executive order directing US withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement — again https://apnews.com/article/trump-paris-agreement-climate-change-788907bb89fe307a964be757313cdfb0 China vowed on Tuesday to continue participating in two cornerstone multinational arrangements -- the World Health Organization and Paris climate accord -- after newly sworn-in US President Donald Trump ordered withdrawals from them. https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250121-china-says-committed-to-who-paris-climate-deal-after-us-pulls-out What's that saying? You hate it when the person you hate is doing good? I can't remember what it is I can't fault them for what they're doing at the moment, even if they are run by an evil dictatorship and do pollute the most I’m not sure how european defense spending is relevant It suggests there is money available in the bank to fund solar/wind/battery, but instead they are preparing for? something? what? who knows. France can make a fighter jet at home but not solar panels apparently. Prehaps they would be made in a country with environmental and labour laws if governments legislated properly to prevent companies outsourcing manufacturing. However this doesnt absolve china. China isnt being forced at Gunpoint to produce these goods with low labour regulation and low environmental regulation. You're right, it doesn't absolve china, and I avoid purchasing things from them wherever possible, my solar panels and EV were made in South Korea, my home battery was made in Germany, there are only a few things in my house made in China, most of them I got second hand but unfortunately there is no escaping the giant of manufacturing. With that said it's one thing for me to sit here and tut tut at China, but I realise I am not most people, the most clearest example is the extreme anti-ai, anti-billionaire bias on this platform, in real life most people don't give a fuck, they love Amazon/Microsoft/Google/Apple etc, they can't go a day without them. So I consider myself a realist, if you want people to buy your stuff then you will need to make the conditions possible for them to WANT to buy your stuff, not out of some moral lecture and Europe isn't doing that, if we look at energy prices: Can someone actually point out to me where this comes from? ... At the end of the day energy is a small % of EU household spending I was looking at corporate/business energy use: Major European companies are already moving to cut costs and retain their competitive edge. For example, Thyssenkrupp, Germany’s largest steelmaker, said on Monday it would slash 11,000 jobs in its steel division by 2030, in a major corporate reshuffle. https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/High-Energy-Costs-Continue-to-Plague-European-Industry.html Prices have since fallen but are still high compared to other countries. A poll by Germany's DIHK Chambers of Industry and Commerce of around 3,300 companies showed that 37% were considering cutting production or moving abroad, up from 31% last year and 16% in 2022. For energy-intensive industrial firms some 45% of companies were mulling slashing output or relocation, the survey showed. "The trust of the German economy in energy policy is severely damaged," Achim Dercks, DIHK deputy chief executive said, adding that the government had not succeeded in providing companies with a perspective for reliable and affordable energy supply. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/more-german-companies-mull-relocation-due-high-energy-prices-survey-2024-08-01/ I've seen nothing to suggest energy prices in the EU are SO cheap that it's worth moving manufacturing TO Europe, and this is what annoys me the most. I've pointed this out before but they have an excellent report on the issues: https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e481fd-2dc3-412d-be4c-f152a8232961_en?filename=The+future+of+European+competitiveness+_+A+competitiveness+strategy+for+Europe.pdf Then they put out this Competitive Compass: https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-competitiveness/competitiveness-compass_en But tbh every week in the EU it seems like they are chasing after some other goal. This would be great, it would have been greater 10 years ago. Agreed
  • 26 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 25 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    roofuskit@lemmy.worldR
    At least the AI doesn't mean to lie to you, unlike the intention of the rest of the site.
  • A ban on state AI laws could smash Big Tech’s legal guardrails

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    121 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    40 Aufrufe
    P
    It's always been "states rights" to enrich rulers at the expense of everyone else.
  • 479 Stimmen
    81 Beiträge
    223 Aufrufe
    douglasg14b@lemmy.worldD
    Did I say that it did? No? Then why the rhetorical question for something that I never stated? Now that we're past that, I'm not sure if I think it's okay, but I at least recognize that it's normalized within society. And has been for like 70+ years now. The problem happens with how the data is used, and particularly abused. If you walk into my store, you expect that I am monitoring you. You expect that you are on camera and that your shopping patterns, like all foot traffic, are probably being analyzed and aggregated. What you buy is tracked, at least in aggregate, by default really, that's just volume tracking and prediction. Suffice to say that broad customer behavior analysis has been a thing for a couple generations now, at least. When you go to a website, why would you think that it is not keeping track of where you go and what you click on in the same manner? Now that I've stated that I do want to say that the real problems that we experience come in with how this data is misused out of what it's scope should be. And that we should have strong regulatory agencies forcing compliance of how this data is used and enforcing the right to privacy for people that want it removed.
  • 0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    D
    I don't think accuracy is an issue either. I've been on the web since inception and we always had a terribly inaccurate information landscape. It's really about individual ability to put together found information to an accurate world model and LLMs is a tool just like any other. The real issues imo are effects on society be it information manipulation, breaking our education and workforce systems. But all of that is overshadowed by meme issues like energy use or inaccuracy as these are easy to understand for any person while sociology, politics and macro economics are really hard.
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet