Kara Swisher, Sam Altman, and the OpenAI Board
We recorded 6 claims from this post. 6 can’t be checked. 6 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (6)
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
“That’s insane. And underscores everything I have said about the company straying from its nonprofit mission.”
What we tested: OpenAI not informing its board in advance of ChatGPT's release shows the company has strayed from its nonprofit mission.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“That’s pretty scary too, given what OpenAI aspires to build.”
What we tested: Altman giving the board inaccurate information on multiple occasions about OpenAI's few formal safety processes is pretty scary, given what OpenAI aspires to build.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Because we can’t have the CEO of a company that potentially powerful behaving that way.”
What we tested: The CEO of a potentially powerful AI company like OpenAI should not be allowed to behave deceptively toward his board.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Probably Sam would still own it if not for Primack’s digging, and we would have one more conflict of interest to worry about.”
What we tested: Altman probably divested from the OpenAI Startup fund because of Dan Primack's reporting and would otherwise still own it.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Reading between the lines, Sam may well wind up with direct equity in the end, after all:”
What we tested: Sam Altman may eventually end up holding direct equity in OpenAI.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Particularly as long as the US is relying essentially on self-regulation and Sam is aspiring to build ever more powerful models with less and less independent oversight, that should concern us all, deeply.”
What we tested: Altman consolidating more and more power while seeming less and less on the level should deeply concern us all, particularly as long as the US relies essentially on self-regulation and Altman aspires to build ever more powerful models with less and less independent oversight.
Held from this post (6)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: Sam Altman was in fact not consistently candid with the OpenAI board.
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: Toner's disclosures and other documented OpenAI lies refute the picture of Sam Altman as innocent.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: Many members of OpenAI's safety team left in recent months, which is unsurprising given Altman's lack of candor.
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: Every bit of evidence that has come out since has seemed to support Marcus's view that the OpenAI board was right to call out Altman, and to undermine Kara Swisher's view that Altman was basically innocent.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: Altman lied by omission in Senate testimony by saying he had no equity in OpenAI while holding indirect stakes through YCombinator and owning the OpenAI Startup investment firm.
- The two reviews read the claim differently