Rebellion over Altman's departure at OpenAI
Sam Altman is no longer CEO of software company OpenAI, which developed the AI chatbot ChatGPT. One of the main faces of the AI boom, Altman, 38, is switching to Microsoft following his surprise dismissal. Now a large majority of the startup's staff are calling for his return and threatening to quit. Commentators see the controversy as significant from several perspectives.
Short-circuited
La Repubblica comments derisively:
“On Friday the guru was kicked out of OpenAI, the company he had founded in 2015; on Saturday he was asked to return; on Sunday he was hired by Bill Gates' Microsoft, and yesterday his old company plunged into chaos. More than 550 of OpenAI's 700 employees signed a letter threatening to quit the company and follow the founder unless the board resigned. Among the signatories is Ilya Sutskever, scientific director and key member of the four-member board that ousted Altman, confirming the total short circuit.”
Everyone must get active on AI
Le Temps warns:
“A handful of individuals - renowned scientists, marketing wizards, key investors - are determining the future of AI. And also our future. The attempts at regulation seem to be lagging behind and to have no impact on the few dozen people in Silicon Valley who are shaping the AI of tomorrow. ... So the future is playing out in a tiny private Californian ecosystem that stands above the embryonic laws, far removed from any public debate. This is dizzying, and should remind us how much the state, the citizens, all of us, need to be involved in the future of these technologies that are so powerful.”
Reason triumphs over greed - for now
Sam Altman's dismissal is the result of a conflict between two schools of thought, explains the Süddeutsche Zeitung:
“Sam Altman belongs to the school of accelerationism, an economic ideology from the 1990s. It sees the acceleration of technological progress as the inevitable future, without regard for society and humanity. Altman was therefore also the driving force behind turning the originally non-profit research institute OpenAI into a profit-orientated company. ... [Co-founder Ilya] Sutskever and Murati, on the other hand, belong to the old school of science which subjects every new finding and technology to tests and practical trials before unleashing it on humanity. For the time being, they have prevailed.”
A taste of conflicts to come
Naftemporiki compares the parting of ways to a failed marriage:
“What began eight years ago as a happy 'marriage' between visionary scientists and entrepreneurs who believed in the AI revolution has ended in a turbulent divorce. ... When children are involved, one should weigh one's words carefully. But in this case the 'child', or rather the way it is being brought up, is probably the reason for the separation. According to several media outlets, the break-up was caused by differences over how and how quickly artificial intelligence should be developed, what safeguards are needed and whether the company should retain its non-profit status. ... This divorce gives us a taste of the many bitter conflicts we will witness in the coming years as AI grows and the challenges become ever greater.”
Regulation a two-edged sword
The question of how to reconcile commercial interests with the common good remains unanswered, De Standaard argues:
“The affair sheds new light on the question of the extent to which supervision and control are necessary in the development of artificial intelligence. The answer is not obvious. The innovative power, the huge sums of money and the demand-orientated approach of profit-oriented companies are major assets. They guarantee that sensible applications are prioritised and that the pace of development is maintained. But these assets can also be disadvantages. Scientists have already said that the pace of development is perhaps too fast. If there are derailments or excesses, who will pull the emergency brake?”