As the OpenAI World Turns: 4 vital questions
We recorded 2 claims from this post. 1 was checked against evidence. 1 can’t be checked. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (2)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“They may well get their way.”
What we tested: OpenAI's investors may well succeed in getting the board to resign and bringing Sam Altman back.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
“We pretty obviously don’t have a say.”
What we tested: The public has no say in how OpenAI's governance crisis is resolved, including its implications for safety and humanity.
What happened: The article describes exclusive director election and removal rights and board control over changes to those rules. This supports the inference that the public lacked a formal role; contemporaneous reporting is used because the available primary bylaws are an older filing. (WIRED, )