[orik]

> Adam D’Angelo is working on ChatGPT competitor Poe.

> Helen Toner & Tasha McCauley are working with OpenPhilanthropy/Anthropic on GovAI board (former board member Holden Karnofsky left when his wife started to get involved with Anthropic)

These seem like much larger conflicts of interest (working with direct competitors) than working on a company that one day this company might want to purchase a product from.

The board was anemic, lost people and didn’t replace them, and then was small enough that you could fire the chairman of the board and then remove the CEO in a friday night massacre.

https://loeber.substack.com/p/a-timeline-of-the-openai-board

[swatcoder]

Those conflicts disappear when you look at the OpenAI nonprofit through its aspiration to steward safe AGI no matter where it arises. It’s meant to transcend specific interests and look more like a technocratic standards body, like an IEEE precursor for AI, than a corporation seeking a private edge. It should have representation of diverse interests.

And that’s exactly why its ownership of an apparent VC rocketship in its profit-making entity was becoming so problematic. Suddenly, it’s critically important transcendence and independence was being threatened by its subsidiary’s outsized and rapid success.

It’s really important to keep in mind that the OpenAI board represents fundamentally different interests than those of the subsidiary developing and selling ChatGPT products. That they may have murdered the latter is not necessarily an accident or mistake.

[tomComb]

Yes, those are conflicts , but that’s with board members which is a very different thing that having conflicts with the CEO.