I'm not sure why you think "HN staff" down ranked this, it's on the front page for me.
But more to the point, I kind of hate it when someone posts something with an obvious negative/snarky context and then defenders try to pretend "he was just asking a valid question!" In my opinion this would be a much better, and more valid post, if the title were simply "What qualifications led Sam Altman to be CEO of OpenAI" or some such.
And, by the way, your assumptions are wrong, pg has written posts on why he thinks sama is one of the most impressive people he's ever met - they even changed the YC rules after him to make the percentage stake that YC takes standardized and non-negotiable because sama was such a good negotiator.
> And, by the way, your assumptions are wrong, pg has written posts on why he thinks sama is one of the most impressive people he's ever met - they even changed the YC rules after him to make the percentage stake that YC takes standardized and non-negotiable because sama was such a good negotiator.
I don't doubt that sama is talented. What's unexpected to me is that there have been many much more successful YC alums than sama yet PG essentially chose him as his successor. It's not unheard of but you'd expect merit amongst startup founders to be rooted in their ability to build large companies and not on other qualifications or abilities in the abstract.
> they even changed the YC rules after him to make the percentage stake that YC takes standardized and non-negotiable because sama was such a good negotiator.
I don't think this is accurate. The first time I did YC they took 7% (2008). The second time PG offered me 3%. This was 2009, after SamA did YC.
I think the tone of the question is a bit more aggressive than it could be. The same question could have been asking without implying Sam Altman is incompetent (I doubt it).
OP think he doesn’t fit the profile required to be head of OpenAI, but, it seems, he’s been quite successful there. It’s easy to judge someone by failed projects but that underestimates one key factor for success: luck. It could be he failed for lack of luck and that he got the job by having a combination of relationships, skills, and luck.
It seems to me OP doesn’t mean incompetent but more like unqualified for that type of position. The best answer to that is to back it up by data that he’s qualified if it is so
There have been many posts and explanations of how the moderators will modify the order of the first page. Sometimes to consolidate duplicates. But often just of their own whims. While this site has an excellent content posted usually, it is not a fully transparent voting system.
It's extremely unlikely that any HN staff "downranked" this post, but I certainly flagged it, and I assume lots of other people did, too. I'm no fan of Altman's, but stories like this are just toxic drama.
I disagree with your flag, but applaud you for publicly stating you flagged it, and stating why you flagged it.
I disagree because I think stories like this can cause interesting information to rise up. As dang's profile says "Conflict is essential to human life"
I'm not HN staff and flagged, this, see other comment for my reasons why. HN staff as a rule stays very far away from anything questioning YC or YC companies per Paul's instructions.
Your assumption has to the best of my knowledge no basis in fact.
Posts without a link are always penalized automatically in the rankings. Some overdiscussed topics are as well I believe so they may be at work. Nobody from HN would have touched it.
hn_throwaway_99|3 years ago
But more to the point, I kind of hate it when someone posts something with an obvious negative/snarky context and then defenders try to pretend "he was just asking a valid question!" In my opinion this would be a much better, and more valid post, if the title were simply "What qualifications led Sam Altman to be CEO of OpenAI" or some such.
And, by the way, your assumptions are wrong, pg has written posts on why he thinks sama is one of the most impressive people he's ever met - they even changed the YC rules after him to make the percentage stake that YC takes standardized and non-negotiable because sama was such a good negotiator.
CyberRabbi|3 years ago
I don't doubt that sama is talented. What's unexpected to me is that there have been many much more successful YC alums than sama yet PG essentially chose him as his successor. It's not unheard of but you'd expect merit amongst startup founders to be rooted in their ability to build large companies and not on other qualifications or abilities in the abstract.
breck|3 years ago
I don't think this is accurate. The first time I did YC they took 7% (2008). The second time PG offered me 3%. This was 2009, after SamA did YC.
jacquesm|3 years ago
VirusNewbie|3 years ago
rbanffy|3 years ago
OP think he doesn’t fit the profile required to be head of OpenAI, but, it seems, he’s been quite successful there. It’s easy to judge someone by failed projects but that underestimates one key factor for success: luck. It could be he failed for lack of luck and that he got the job by having a combination of relationships, skills, and luck.
grugagag|3 years ago
mhb|3 years ago
CyberRabbi|3 years ago
Topgamer7|3 years ago
tptacek|3 years ago
breck|3 years ago
I disagree because I think stories like this can cause interesting information to rise up. As dang's profile says "Conflict is essential to human life"
jacquesm|3 years ago
Your assumption has to the best of my knowledge no basis in fact.
breck|3 years ago
I also vouched for your comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34471998, which should not have been flagged.
version_five|3 years ago