OpenAI is INVESTIGATED by Law Firm. The TRUTH about the Board's Firing of Sam Altman is Revealed...

Summary

The script discusses the controversy surrounding OpenAI, with allegations of a coup attempt to oust Sam Altman in November. The New York Times and other publications reported on the situation, citing anonymous sources. Meera Madi, implicated in the reports, denies the claims and criticizes the previous board's actions. An independent review by WilmerHale found no evidence of wrongdoing by Altman or Greg Brockman, leading to their reinstatement. The review also highlighted a breakdown in trust between the board and Altman. Additionally, the script touches on the potential influence of the effective altruism movement on AI research and the concerns raised by NIST staff over the appointment of an EA-affiliated researcher to the US AI safety Institute.

Takeaways

• 📰 Media outlets are reporting a coup at OpenAI involving Meera Madi, but she denies the allegations and claims the previous board scapegoated her.
• 🤖 Meera Madi emphasizes her strong partnership with Sam Altman and her direct communication with him, refuting claims of her involvement in any coup.
• 📝 An anonymous email to the New York Times is suggested as the source of the initial story, which was then picked up by other publications.
• 🔍 The New York Times lawsuit against OpenAI is mentioned, with some suggesting the newspaper's claims may be misleading or incomplete.
• 🤔 The exact reasons behind the coup attempt and the subsequent fallout are not entirely clear, with various parties offering different perspectives.
• 👥 Helen Toner, a key figure in the OpenAI drama, is mentioned as having a significant role in the events leading up to the coup attempt.
• 🔄 The situation at OpenAI has led to discussions about the influence of the effective altruism movement and its impact on AI development and governance.
• 📊 An internal crisis at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is highlighted, with staff protesting the potential appointment of an effective altruist AI researcher.
• 🚨 The WilmerHale review found no evidence of safety or security concerns leading to Sam Altman's termination, but identified a breakdown in trust between the board and Altman.
• 🔙 The review recommended that Altman and Greg Brockman continue to lead OpenAI, with the board expressing full confidence in their leadership.
• 📈 The drama at OpenAI and NIST reflects broader tensions and debates over the direction and governance of AI research and development.

Q & A

What is the main controversy surrounding Mira Madi and Sam Altman?

The controversy involves allegations that Mira Madi was behind a coup to remove Sam Altman from OpenAI in November. However, Mira Madi denies these claims, stating that she was scapegoated by the previous board with anonymous and misleading claims.

How did Mira Madi respond to the New York Times article accusing her of orchestrating a coup?

Mira Madi responded by stating that the claims are disheartening and that she provided feedback to board members about Sam Altman when asked, but never initiated any action against him. She emphasizes her strong partnership with Sam and her commitment to OpenAI's mission.

What was the role of Helen Toner in the events leading up to the coup attempt at OpenAI?

Helen Toner was one of the board members who had links to controversial organizations and was suspected to be the main person behind the coup attempt. She was involved in efforts to either dismantle OpenAI or give it over to Anthropic.

What did the independent review by WilmerHale find about the events in November and December 2023 at OpenAI?

The review found a breakdown in trust between the prior board and Sam Altman, leading to the events of November 17th. It concluded that the board acted within its discretion but that Sam Altman's conduct did not mandate his removal. The review recommended that the full board endorse the decision to rehire Altman and Brockman.

What was the reaction of the staff at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to the expected appointment of Paul Christiano?

There was a significant backlash, with staff members and scientists threatening to resign over the anticipated appointment of Paul Christiano, due to his ties to the effective altruism movement, which they felt could compromise the institute's objectivity and integrity.

What is the significance of the effective altruism movement in the context of AI and its associated controversies?

Effective altruism is an intellectual project that uses evidence and reason to maximize benefits for others. However, it has been criticized for turning into a cult-like group with influential and wealthy adherents. Its association with AI, particularly through individuals like Helen Toner and Paul Christiano, has sparked debates over the direction and ethics of AI development.

What was the outcome of the lawsuit between the New York Times and OpenAI?

The provided script does not specify the outcome of the lawsuit. However, it mentions that the New York Times was involved with OpenAI and that there were allegations of the Times manipulating prompts to produce content that looked like it was copyrighted.

How did Andrew Ang, co-founder of Cera, react to the New York Times lawsuit against OpenAI?

Andrew Ang expressed sympathy with OpenAI and Microsoft, stating that the New York Times' presentation was muddying the distinction between AI training on documents and outputting copyrighted content. He believes that AI should be allowed to read and learn from documents on the open internet, just like humans.

What measures is OpenAI taking to improve its governance and transparency?

OpenAI is adopting new key enhancements, including creating a whistleblower hotline for anonymous reporting by employees and contractors, as part of their commitment to improve governance and transparency.

What was the public's perception of Helen Toner's actions at OpenAI, according to a poll?

The poll indicated that a significant portion of the public (39%) viewed Helen Toner's actions as entirely negative, with 27% believing she had good intentions but executed poorly, and only 4% approved of everything she did.

Outlines

00:00

📰 Media Frenzy Over Mira's Involvement

The media is buzzing with claims that Mira is behind a coup that ousted Sam Alman from OpenAI. However, Mira Moradi disputes these allegations, stating that the accusations are scapegoating and misleading. She emphasizes the importance of her governance role and the need for stability at OpenAI. Mira also addresses the issue of board members with controversial affiliations and their attempts to dismantle or control OpenAI, which she vehemently opposed.

05:00

🤝 Partnership and Misunderstandings

Mira Moradi clarifies her relationship with Sam Alman, highlighting their strong and productive partnership. She refutes the claims that she ever reached out to the board about Sam, but did provide feedback when asked. Mira expresses frustration over the situation and looks forward to moving past the gossip and focusing on work. The narrative suggests a lack of evidence supporting the accusations against her and questions the motivations behind the media's portrayal.

10:01

📝 The Role of New York Times and Anonymous Sources

The script discusses the role of the New York Times in reporting the story, citing anonymous sources. It questions the credibility of these sources and the subsequent media echo chamber that amplified the narrative without verification. The situation is further complicated by the New York Times' involvement with OpenAI and the lawsuit against the organization, which raises questions about the newspaper's impartiality and the accuracy of its reporting.

15:03

🤔 The Mystery of the Coup and Board Dynamics

The script delves into the internal dynamics of OpenAI's board, suggesting that certain members may have attempted a coup without clear motivations. It explores the possibility that these board members were influenced by external organizations and their potential impact on OpenAI's future. The narrative also touches on the importance of trust and communication within the board and the consequences of a breakdown in these areas.

20:04

📜 Legal Analysis and the Future of OpenAI

The script presents a legal analysis of the situation at OpenAI, with a law firm conducting a thorough review of the events leading to the removal of Sam Alman and Greg Brockman from the board. The review found no justification for their removal and recommended their reinstatement, expressing full confidence in their leadership. The board's actions were found to be a result of a breakdown in trust rather than concerns over product safety, security, or financial issues. The script also mentions the addition of new board members and the implementation of a whistleblower hotline as part of OpenAI's efforts to improve governance and transparency.

25:05

🚨 Effective Altruism and Its Influence on AI

The script discusses the influence of Effective Altruism (EA) on AI, particularly in the context of OpenAI's internal conflicts. It mentions Helen Toner, a board member associated with EA, and her potential role in the coup attempt. The narrative also touches on the broader implications of EA's involvement in AI, including its potential impact on the direction and safety of AI development. The script raises questions about the motivations and ethics of EA's approach to AI and the potential for it to become a contested topic in the AI community.

🛑 NIST Staff Revolt Against EA Appointment

The script reports on an internal crisis at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), where staff members are threatening to resign over the expected appointment of Paul Cristiano, an AI researcher with ties to EA. The concerns revolve around the potential compromise of the institute's objectivity and integrity due to Cristiano's association with EA. The narrative also touches on the broader implications of EA's influence on AI safety and the potential for it to become a divisive issue within the AI community.

Keywords

💡Coup

A coup refers to a sudden, often violent and illegal seizure of power from a government. In the context of the video, it is used metaphorically to describe the attempt by some board members to oust Sam Altman from OpenAI, which is portrayed as a significant internal conflict within the organization.

💡Sam Altman

Sam Altman is a key figure in the video, serving as the CEO of OpenAI. His removal and subsequent reinstatement form the central narrative of the video, highlighting the power dynamics and internal struggles within the company.

💡OpenAI

OpenAI is an artificial intelligence research organization featured prominently in the video. It is the setting for the events described, and the video discusses its governance, leadership, and the controversy surrounding its board members and their actions.

💡Board Members

Board members are individuals who oversee the management and direction of a company. In the video, certain board members are implicated in a controversial attempt to change leadership at OpenAI, which led to a significant internal conflict and public scrutiny.

💡Anonymous Claims

Anonymous claims refer to allegations made without attribution, often to protect the identity of the source. In the video, these claims are used to cast doubt on the integrity of the board members involved in the coup, suggesting that they may have used such tactics to spread misinformation.

💡Media Scapegoating

Media scapegoating involves using the media to blame someone or something for a problem or controversy. In the video, Mira Madi accuses the previous board of scapegoating her in the media, suggesting that they tried to shift blame onto her for the internal issues at OpenAI.

💡New York Times

The New York Times is a prestigious newspaper mentioned in the video as the source of the initial report on the OpenAI controversy. The video discusses the newspaper's role in spreading the story and the potential impact of its reporting on public perception of the events.

💡AI Safety

AI safety refers to the measures taken to ensure that artificial intelligence systems do not cause harm. The video touches on concerns about AI safety and the potential for AI to be developed responsibly, which is a central issue in the debate over the leadership and direction of OpenAI.

💡Effective Altruism

Effective altruism is a philosophical and social movement that uses evidence and reason to determine the most effective ways to benefit others. In the video, it is mentioned in relation to Helen Tönnies and Paul Christiano, suggesting that their association with this movement may influence their perspectives on AI and its development.

💡Whistleblower Hotline

A whistleblower hotline is a confidential reporting system for individuals to disclose information about illegal or unethical activities within an organization. The video mentions the creation of such a hotline at OpenAI as a measure to improve transparency and accountability following the internal conflict.

Highlights

Newspapers accuse Mira Mira of being behind a coup that ousted Sam Alman from OpenAI in November.

Mira Mira posts a response on March 8th, denying involvement and criticizing the previous board's actions.

Mira claims the previous board scapegoated her with anonymous and misleading claims.

The New York Times, Business Insider, and New York Post publish articles citing unnamed sources.

Mira emphasizes her strong partnership with Sam and her direct feedback to him, not the board.

Helen Toner, a key figure in the coup, is mentioned as having links to controversial organizations.

Mira's message to her team dismisses the media's claims as nonsense and looks forward to moving past the drama.

The New York Times is involved with OpenAI, and there is a lawsuit between them.

Andrew Ang, a respected figure in AI, sympathizes with OpenAI and Microsoft over the New York Times lawsuit.

The WilmerHale review found a breakdown in trust between the prior board and Sam Altman.

The review concluded that Sam Altman and Greg Brockman are the right leaders for OpenAI.

The board expressed full confidence in Sam Altman and Greg Brockman's ongoing leadership.

The New York Times is accused of muddling the distinction between AI reading copyrighted content and reproducing it.

The lawsuit between the New York Times and OpenAI is seen as a threat to independent media.

Sam Altman thanks Meera for her strong partnership and leadership during the drama.

Greg Brockman apologizes for suspecting a former board member of harming OpenAI.

OpenAI adopts new guidelines, including a whistleblower hotline for employees and contractors.

A revolt at NIST against the expected appointment of an effective altruist AI researcher to the US AI safety Institute.

Staff members and scientists at NIST threaten to resign over the appointment, citing concerns about objectivity and integrity.

The effective altruism movement is described as having turned into a cult-like group.

Sam Bankman-Fried's lawyers argue for a reduced prison sentence due to his autism.

Transcripts

tons more opening eye drama today the

newspaper headlines are a buzz with this

new discovery everyone's pointing their

finger at mira mira as the person behind

the coup that kicked out Sam Alman back

in November New York Times Business

Insider New York Post and many many more

here's the problem if you've been

following that whole thing going on open

AI this doesn't seem to line up with

reality here's Mir moradi so she posted

this March 8th so this was published

March 7 so this is probably as a

response to their claims to their

discoveries so M Madi governance of an

institution is critical for oversight

stability and continuity I am happy that

the independent review has concluded and

we can all move forward it has been

disheartening to witness the previous

board's efforts to scapegoat me with

Anonymous and misleading claims in a

last Stitch effort to save face in the

media here's the message I sent to my

team last night onward so for people

that uh aren't aware so basically there

were several people on the board before

this that have links to some

controversial organizations and as far

as we know as far as we understand they

kind of started that coup to kick Sam

Alman out and they were trying to either

dismantle opening eye or give it over to

anthropic we'll come back to that in

just a second but here's Mir Madi so

she's posting this this is her message

to the team she's saying hi everyone

some of you may have seen the New York

Times article about me and the old board

I find frustrating that some people seem

to want to cause chaos as we are trying

to move on but to very briefly comment

on the specific claims here Sam and I

have a strong and productive partnership

and I have not been shy about sharing

feedback with him directly I never

reached out to the board to give

feedback about Sam however when

individual board members reached out

directly to me for feedback about Sam I

provided it all feedback Sam already

knew that does not in any way mean that

I'm responsible for or supported the old

board's app actions which I still find

perplexing and and yes so do a lot of

people I think they didn't they never

quite explained what their reasons or

motivations were I fought their actions

aggressively and we all worked together

to bring Sam back really looking forward

to get the Board review done and put

gossip behind us back to work okay so

she's saying all those hit pieces or

whatever articles are nonsense so what

would have caused all these people to

post this information what evidence do

they have for it well as far as I can

tell the New York Times was the first

and they refer to people familiar with

the matter so this is this is kind of

their Source it's just some people that

were familiar with the matter later you

find out it was an anonymous email so

here's Business Insider and Business

Insider basically just reposting the

same publication saying well the New

York Times set it citing unnamed sources

and then like New York Post just repost

the same story going well it's a

according to the New York Times and so

here Mira mad is saying so it sounds

like I mean I'm kind of reading between

the lines here she's saying it's been

disheartening to witness the previous

board's effort to scapegoat me with

Anonymous and misleading claims in a

last Stitch effort to say face in the

media so I'm reading this as she's

saying the previous board members sent

this Anonymous like made up a story sent

it to New York Times and then that set

off this reaction where just every

single publication started posting it

with no very ification cuz again this

doesn't fit with what we cannot know to

have happened so and so mirira classy a

very classy person of course is not

naming any names here not pointing

fingers but but I mean we we know who

she's talking about here's you know in

case you weren't aware here's the person

posting right below her going oh so

these two well let's make sure we are

careful putting them any any in any

future governance roles red flags well

and truly noted so this is Helen toner

and she so she was one of the people it

it sounds like she was the main person

behind what was happening behind the

coup again a lot of this is we don't

quite know what happened as far as I can

tell these two managed to get Ilia on

board and were able to kind of put those

Wheels in Motion I believe ilot wasn't

for that in the first place but she kind

of posted her own sort of side of the

story so this is 14 hours ago and she's

saying so this is a statement from Helen

toner and Tasha mcau so this is Tasha

mcau so she blocked her uh protected her

posts it's very possible that these

people have got a lot of hate on Twitter

and I mean this is unfortunate this is

not a good thing because and look I got

to say this so every once in a while you

know somebody on Twitter or elsewhere on

social media gets targeted for these

sort of attacks these Mass attacks by

people where everybody just like

screaming insults at them I personally

I'm I'm against that I think that shuts

down communication just cuz you don't

like somebody and you have an Avenue to

like yell at them over the the internet

I know that might feel good in the

moment but overall it just creates

really bad environments it's it shuts

down communication but so she post this

statement from herself and Tasha mcau

and here's the problem you know how

sometimes people write these long

statements and at the end of the

statement you're like what did that even

say did that have any sort of data or

was it just words a bunch of words Shunk

together I'm not really seeing anything

here so she's saying well open eyes

mission is general intelligence benefits

all feity yeah we know that and the open

ey structure the board to protect that

sure accountability is important of

course AGI could be world changing yes

we hope the new board does its job sure

resistance to oversight should be

unacceptable sure this work is important

sure good luck to the new board sure

what did you say in here I just I think

a lot of this comes from the fact that

these people won't say what the issue

was the only statement they made was Sam

Alman wasn't consistently can candid in

his Communications what does that even

mean like are you saying he lied about

some critical things what is

consistently candid mean does it mean he

didn't tell you something that like they

don't have to spill all the secrets of

open AI but we just need to know what's

happening and these people they

attempted a coup and never as far as I

know never really explained why and now

it seems like if I'm reading kind of

like what this is what M Madi is saying

correctly or what she's implying is now

they're sending these kind of anonymous

tips to New York times New York Times

just posts it everybody else just cites

New York Times it's like well it must be

true now at the same time New York Times

is involved AOSS with open Ai and look I

understand that with New York Times you

know there's a lot of like political

things because right maybe New York

Times prints something that doesn't

align with people's political views and

so they say oh New York Times is lying

or whatever but I mean a lot of people

have spoke out on this matter of the New

York Times lawsuit against openi open AI

themselves said you know what New York

Times is isn't telling the whole story

it seems like they've manipulated the

prompts somehow to have Chad gbt produce

content that looks like it's copyrighted

you know I have a whole video where I

try to kind of reproduce What what

happens with what's alleged in a lawsuit

to me it doesn't seem like like it's

possible to get the responses that New

York Times says they they got it's just

not how Chad gbt structures its

responses and in the lawsuit New York

Times also they cut out they kind of

Photoshop out the bottom of the response

and that's where we would know for sure

if cuz if they were using a prompt to

they just kind of reread something that

they gave to it that would become

Apparent at the sort of summary of the

response by Chad PT because it would say

and so that that's from the article you

gave me right that you uploaded or

whatever so they cut that part out so we

can't definitively know but here's

Andrew Ang so he's the co-founder of

Cera so from Stanford by do work for

Google brain really highly respected

person in the AI industry and so he's

saying after reading the kind of the New

York Times lawsuit he finds his

sympathies more with open Ai and

Microsoft than with the New York Times

and I'll link this down below if you

want to read it but quick point so he's

saying that the New York Times kind of

the presentation muddies that's the word

that they use and in fact that's one

word that it's actually really good to

use CU looking at the New York Times

response like they do try muddy two

points that are separate right so point

one is was the material copied was the

material used by the models which is

fine we' we've have preceden in the

coure system where like for example

Google crawl Bots when they're indexing

the web they crawl through a lot of

sites obviously all that is you know

copyrighted content so that crawlbot

going through the various websites and

that's not breaking anyone's copyright

rights the thing that you can do is

output copyright content like if you

think about it you can go look at a

copyrighted picture you just can't use

that picture for your own for your own

sort of business right I can read a

copyrighted article I can't reproduce it

the Reading part is not illegal you can

read stuff Google Bots can crawl the

internet right so copyright protection

is for you know protecting the the

output you can't just copy somebody's

work and replicate and use it Etc and so

Andre an here is saying that well what

New York Times is doing is it kind of

tries to muddy to kind of mash that two

together so you're not quite sure which

one they're talking about and there's a

lot of commentary on social media that

because of what he believes is a muddy

presentation it draws a link between

them that I'm not sure that's what

people think it is right so people kind

of are confused because they don't

understand the distinction you know New

York Times doesn't really help them

understand that distinction and so

they're like oh it must be open ey is

doing something bad right he's saying

look he understands why media companies

don't want AI training on their

documents but believe believe that just

as humans are allowed to read documents

on the open internet learn from them and

synthesize brand new ideas AI should be

allowed to do so as well right I mean

that's what happened here so New York

Times posted this and then Business

Insider just rewrote that article right

cite of the New York Times New York Post

did the same thing right the New York

Times isn't suing them for reading the

article right that would be silly this

is totally normal this is totally within

copyright laws and then he says on two

so what was Chad gbt reproducing New

York Times articles he's saying that he

suspects a lot of examples of Chad GPT

regurgitating articles nearly verbatim

were due to a rag likee mechanism so

this is again I'm trying to simplify

stuff so everybody can understand it and

hopefully I'm doing Justice to what he's

saying so I apologize if I'm not but I

mean kind of how I would have said that

is New York Times uploaded some

documents to Chad GPT and then they were

like hey Chad GPT read that back to me

or in this case it's where the user

prompts the system to browse the web and

retrieve a specific article and then

print it out right and then he's saying

if my statement here isn't accurate I

would love to see New York Times clarify

this and again they they haven't and

he's saying to be clear I believe

Independent Media is important for

democracy and must be protected I also

sympathize with media businesses worried

about generative AI disrupting their

business but I'm not convinced the New

York Times lawsuit is the right way to

do this right and I really agree with

the statement because we need to have

have open independent trustworthy media

right there's been a massive massive

decline in newspaper advertising Revenue

as you know so you can imagine a line

here that that shows Google's ad Revenue

just skyrocketing as newspaper

advertising Revenue just plummets and so

that's of course putting a lot of

pressure on them they're worried about

if they're going to be able to continue

and now you have this generative AI

disrupting their business potentially

moving forward but as Andrew Ang says

I'm not convinced the New York Times

lawsuit is the right way to do do this

and so I I am also the same opinion

they're not going about it in the right

way this is not good for their

credibility all these other sites they

just kind of reposted without checking I

think it undermines everyone's

credibility so in response to this Jimmy

apples Jimmy freaking apples which could

this be Sam alman's alt his Anonymous

Twitter account is that what's happening

here he says Open the Eyes nothing

without its drama right playing on the

whole Open the Eyes nothing without its

people quotes and he's saying now that

this is out of the way let's get on to

the release already because if you

haven't been following yesterday for

example I like many other people assumed

that we're going to see a big release

rolling out of open AI I sat there in

suspense waiting nothing happened well

there was a big announcement that it

will'll get to right now that was posted

in the evening and it's not what we were

kind of expected by the way Sam Al

responded to Jimmy Apple saying patience

Jimmy it will be worth the weights which

is kind of important because a lot of

people called me crazy for following

Jimmy apples for posting some of his

stuff saying it's just some Anonymous

account that's just trolling everybody

as we've covered on this channel it's

more than that because here's Sam Alman

confirming that some of these leaks are

true I mean to me this is a little bit

heavy-handed I feel like this kind of

breaks the mystery but okay that's fine

all right Jimmy responds It's the final

countdown Bros quote tweeting himself

love the dedication Sam I apologize if

you're confused by this this is just me

doing Victory laps around the track

yelling I Told You So I Told You So

shortly prior to that tweet samon says

I'm very happy to welcome our new board

members and we'll dive into who these

people are and he's saying I'm thankful

to everyone our team for being resilient

a great open AI skill and staying

focused during a challenging time in

particular I want to thank Meera for a

strong partnership and her leadership

during the drama so wait Sam mman saying

she wants to thank mea for the strong

partnership wait I thought the New York

Times said look at this they said she

was the one that pushed them out Mir

Madi pushed them out so confused it

almost seems like New York Times was not

correct and so he's saying that thank

Meera for a strong partnership and her

leadership during the drama since that

time and in all the Quiet Moments where

it really counts Greg so he that's one

of the co-founders with Sam upman so I

think he was there from the beginning we

kind of saw a little bit of that play

out with the Elon Musk lawsuit and he's

saying being in the trenches always

sucks but much better being there with

the two of them and this is the

important part he's saying I learned a

lot from this experience one I think

I'll say now when I believed a former

board member was harming open AI through

some of their actions so he was saying

at some point he was suspecting you know

a former board member again we kind of

know who he's probably referring to was

harming open a ey through some of their

actions I should have handled that

situation with Grace and care I

apologize for this and I wish I had done

done it differently I assume a genuine

belief in The crucial importance of

getting AGI right from everyone involved

we have important work in front of us

and we can't wait to show you what's

next it sounds like maybe this piece

delayed the announcement a little bit

who knows but I mean between what m is

saying between what Sam alman's saying

here I mean it's pretty clearcut there

were people in the organization that

that kind of moved into positions of

power and then covertly try to take over

try to tear everything down now

seemingly they're also reaching out to

certain Publications to try to further

like undermine what happened and the

people involved and to maybe in part

address some of the claims openi this is

their official blog open.com blog right

they post this review completed and

Altman Brockman to continue to lead

openai so the new board went through did

a full review did a full audit and we

have unanimously concluded that Sam and

Greg are the right leaders for openi so

and this was after the special Committee

of openi board today announced the

completion of the review by Wilmer hail

the firm conducted dozens of interviews

with members of open ey's board so it

looks like the previous board that were

there during this whole time that knew

about it open ey executive advisers to

the prior board and other pertinent

Witnesses they reviewed more than 30,000

documents EV valued various corporate

actions based on the record developed by

Wilmer hail and following the

recommendations of the special committee

the board expressed its full confidence

in Mr Sam Alman and Mr Greg brockman's

ongoing leadership of open Ai and

they're adding three new board members

Dr Sue Desmond Helman former CEO of Bill

and Melinda GS foundation and the board

of directors at fiser and on the

president's Council of advisers on

Science and Technology Nicole Seligman

and fidi Simo so she is so she is the

CEO of instacart and they will continue

working closely with the current board

members Adam D'Angelo so he was uh he

was on the board during the whole coup

initially we thought that maybe he was

the one behind it because of some

conflict of interests but that turned

out not to the case he's on the board

and I believe he's the founder and the

CEO of quora and then Larry Summers

Brett Taylor Greg Sam and opening eyes

Senior Management so we've covered them

in various other videos and they're also

adopting a few new key enhancements so I

mean various guidelines what jumped out

on me is this one creating a

whistleblower hotline to serve as an

anonymous reporting resource for all

open employees and contractors but this

is where I think we get into kind of the

meat of what happened so this is after

they did the audit the review so this is

Wilmer hail so an international law firm

as they describe themselves and so they

were looking into kind of doing a review

of the events that happened in November

and December 2023 with the removal of

Sam mman and Greg Brockman from the open

AI board of directors and termination of

Sam Alman as CEO so they reviewed 30,000

documents all the stuff that we talked

about so it seems like they did a really

really deep kind of analysis of this

which I got to say I mean let's if if I

was part of that company of the Wilmer

hail I was like one of the the people

that is just pouring over those

documents I don't know number one I feel

like this would be one of the more

exciting projects that I would work on

and two I I would go pretty deep I got

to say I'd be like just give me all the

documents you have just let me kind of

browse because maybe something you know

just in case maybe something will be

relevant to the to the findings whatever

whatever language they use and so they

kind of go deep over kind of like what

the process has been they said they went

over the what happened during that time

and they flagged a few additional issues

and kind of the one sentence summary is

Wilmer Hae found there was a breakdown

in trust between the prior board and Mr

Alman that precipitated the events of

November 17th so Wilmer Hae reviewed the

public post issued by the prior board

and they concluded that it actually

recounted the prior board's decision and

rationals at the time the board thought

that taking the actions that they did it

would help you know avert certain

management challenges as they say they

did not anticipate that the actions

would destabilize the company and this

is also important they found that this

did not arise out of concerns regarding

product safety or security right so this

wasn't you know they developed Ai and it

escaped and like whoops they shut

everything down or you know potentially

something that could be viewed as a

security issue which that was one of the

things that we talked about some leaked

documents made it seem like maybe Ilia

saw something that kind of spooked him

uh and everybody else also at the same

time something that is potentially

dangerous and so here they're saying so

this this was not due to safety or the

pace of development or opening eyes

finances or statements to investors

customers so you know there's no

Shenanigans involved no no lies no no

safety issues ETC instead it was a

consequence of a breakdown in the

relationship and loss of trust between

the prior board and Mr Altman and

they're saying so the board kind of uh

pulled the trigger too fast right so it

implemented its decision on an Abridged

time frame they went too fast and broke

stuff so without advanced notice to key

shareholders you know there was not a

full inquiry there was no opportunity

for Mr Altman to address the PRI board's

concerns and I think that's what uh

maybe spooked a lot of people and caused

a lot of the stuff it seemed like a coup

a lot of people were calling it a coup

uh it just they tried to do it so fast

it just turned everything upside down

Wilmer hail found that the prior board

acted within its broad discretion to

terminate Mr Altman but also found that

his conduct did not mandate approval

That was supposed to read did not

mandate removal as in Sam Alman did not

do anything that would justify his

termination after reviewing the Wilmer

halil findings they recommended to the

full board that it endorse the November

21 decision to rehire Mr Alman man and

Mr Brockman and they expressed its full

confidence in Mr Altman and Mr

brockman's ongoing leadership of openi

so basically are saying yeah let's put

let's put them back in charge so uh we

don't know what might have happened but

based on some of the other documents and

stuff like that that we've read during

the time in November so Helen toner in

the months leading up to that posted a

paper so she's one of the authors

decoding intentions right and there's

this part uh let's see so this is like

page 29 I think and so this paper starts

with the Cuban Missile Crisis and sort

of like the Soviet versus the US uh

potential nuclear conflict with with

missiles being you know very close to us

soil right so that's that's how this

starts and then on page 29 that's where

maybe the passages that maybe sparked

some of the conflict again this is this

is conjecture so we don't know

everything that happened this could have

been part of what triggered some of

these events and so here they're

describing sort of the gp4 the launch of

G gp4 model versus anop opic's decision

to delay the release of its chatbot so

we're not going to read this whole

document uh it's quite a bit I'll post a

link below if you want to read it but

basically the idea here is this idea of

a race to the bottom so basically in the

race to win the AI Wars so to speak so

getting the best models out there

getting the most users you know you can

imagine a situation where these

companies kind of in a quest for profit

for users could potentially cut Corners

in in AI safety I mean you could

certainly imagine that happening and so

in this document Helen toner is is an

author of so they're listing they're

mentioning that you know what anthropics

chat about claw it's been deliberately

delayed in order to avoid advancing the

rate of AI capabilities so they

purposely sort of pulled back on how

quickly they deployed stuff and they

deliberately decide not to productize

the technology in order to avoid stoking

the Flames of AI hype but once a similar

product Chad GPT was released by another

company maybe that pushed um anthropic

to you know increase how quickly it was

deploying stuff and so I think this

sentence kind of represents you know

maybe the problem that caused the

conflict so they're saying by delaying

the release of CLA until another company

put out a similarly capable product

anthropic was showing its willingness to

avoid exactly the kind of frantic Corner

cutting that the release of Chad PT

appeared to Spur and so you know you can

think of this as maybe being perceived

as you know somebody that's on the board

of open AI kind of criticizing open Ai

and maybe putting stuff out there that

you know could be a problem and by the

way so here it says the New York Times

report said Alman complained in an email

about the paper's criticism of open Ai

and praise of anthropics approach and

then alen reportedly said it amounted to

criticism from a board member and

indicated it was damaging to open a ey

and the other thing to note here so

toner has described herself in the past

as an effective altruist so effective

altruism or EA as it's referred to so

just keep that in mind cuz this that's a

whole separate thing that's kind of

evolving thing right now kind of the

relationship of EA and Ai and artificial

intelligence so 3 months ago back when

all this stuff was happening so I posted

this on the channel asking what are your

thoughts on Helen toner so we got almost

4,000 people that took took part in this

to vote right so and basically the the

three main responses were you approved

of everything she did that she did the

right things for the right reason and

again only 4% of the people thought that

was the case 27% of the people so a big

chunk of the people right said good

intention

but she executed poorly and failed so

again and so the this deep dive that we

just covered by that legal firm I mean

that's kind of what they're saying that

maybe although they never talked about

really her intentions just to break down

Communications but certainly they said

that the execution was was bad right so

and then almost 40% of you so 39% said

all bad so bad ideas bad bad ethics you

know bad execution of what she was

trying to do just a complete fail

anyways it's curious sometimes to look

back at it now especially I mean 4,000

responses is a a pretty good sample of

people I feel like I think it is kind of

Representative of what people following

AI kind of think so you know we still

don't know exactly what caused the rift

but certainly it seems like whatever the

response was maybe it was not only an

overreaction but maybe kind of botched

in the way that it was uh attempted now

while all this is happening so this is

March 7th

2024 this headline hits nist staffers

revolt against expected appointment of

effective altruist AI researcher to the

US AI safety Institute nist is the

National Institute of Standards and

technology so nist is facing an internal

crisis as staff members and scientists

have threatened to resign over the

anticipated appointment of Paul

Cristiano that's him right here and he

previously ran the language model

alignment team at open Ai and so

Christiano who is known for his ties to

the effective altruism movement was

allegedly rushed through the hiring

process without any anyone knowing until

today one of the sources said and so it

sounds like a lot of the employees there

felt that his association with EA would

compromise the institute's objectivity

and integrity and so by the way this is

on Venture beat I'll post a link below

so they're saying many say that EA

effective altruism you know it's defined

as intellectual project using evidence

and reason to figure out how to benefit

others as much as possible but it turned

into a cult-like group of Highly

influential and Wealthy adherence and it

was made famous by the f CX founder and

jailbird Sam bankman freed so I believe

he got something like a 100 years for

fraud and other charges related to the

collapse of his crypto exchange FTX and

so his lawyers are arguing that his

prison senses should be reduced

significantly to 5 to 6 years because of

his autism now I'm not a lawyer so take

this with a grain of salt but I'm going

to go ahead and say it I don't think

that approach will work now I'm kind of

kidding of course obviously you know

you're not going to get one10 of of the

sentence for fraud because of ASD I mean

there's no chance of that but I mean I

got to say so they're saying you know

he's uniquely vulnerable in prison due

to difficulties with social cues and

Unwritten rules write certain

inconsistent facial expressions and tone

of voice may lead to miscommunications

right ASD would affect how he evaluates

risk I mean I got to say this is all

like 100% accurate like he is you know I

think it's easy to see why somebody with

autism might have have have unique sort

of set of risks in a situation like that

they didn't put him in the quote unquote

nice jail with the with the white color

crime you know they put him in like the

really really bad one now I wasn't

really aware of effective altruism uh I

don't know too much about it so I

apologize if maybe I'm missing some

points here I'll try to read up a little

bit more but I first heard of it when

Sam bankman freed during his kind of

court case I didn't follow that too

closely but I just saw headlines and the

second time I ran into EA was with Helen

toner and the thing that was happening

with at open Ai and now this is the

third time so this is Paul Cristiano and

now there seems to be some sort of a

rebellion against appointing an

effective altruist to the usai safety

Institute people are threatening to quit

including some sounds like they said

quote star employees I don't know if

there's any specifics here but once

again it sounds like AI is becoming

another sort of contested topic with

different people people at different

sort of political views or organizations

that they belong to Social Clubs they

belong to now will start trying to push

and pull AI in whatever direction that

they feel is right but this is uh

heating up so stay tuned my name is Wes

rth and thank you for watching