Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
The sub header for this paper is hilarious.
"I think there's a small but real chance he's eventually remembered as a Bernie Madoff- or Sam Bankman-Fried-level scammer."
HAHAHAHA, no shit, he may just as well end up in a new league all his own with how much money will burn once this goes belly up.
hes basically the version of Musk for AI/coding. plus the trifecta of scammers came from the same place, paypal, thiel and musk, and altman and thiel's gay pool parties.
So the typical Tech CEO. What's new?
Not only have I (25 year programming vet) never had a CEO who could code, I've never had a CEO who thought he should be able to code. As a species, they tend to be proud of their leadership chops rather than their ability to actually do anything.
No C-Suite suit I’ve ever met in my life has struck me as a leader type. I know there’s some out there but they all think that being in charge makes them leaders.
Yeah, I should have put "leadership" in ironic quotes. Like they say: don't step in the leadership.
Pretty much. These guys are all marketing with not so much understanding of the tech their hawking
AI guy is bad at coding
surprisedPikachu.jpg
CEOs are required to be skilled manipulators. That's literally what their job is, actually.
So AI could do their job 10x better?
That's what ppl keep saying. Effectively they are overpaid mascot.
they are the patsies for the board of the directors usually they have the power,and act as lightning rods, its a plus if they use woman to take the flack (aka glass cliff)
21 years later, here I am learning the term.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_cliff
The glass cliff is a phenomenon described by psychologists Michelle K. Ryan and S. Alexander Haslam, in which women are more likely to break the "glass ceiling" (i.e. achieve leadership roles in business and government) during periods of crisis or downturn when the risk of failure is highest. Other research has expanded the definition of the glass cliff phenomenon to include racial and ethnic minority groups.
Unironically yes.
90% of what CEOs do is talk to other CEOs and other C Suite members. Very rarely are they actually subject matter experts, those days are long gone. Externally, they are mascots, internally, they read reports from their underlings and then 'make the final call'.
You may notice that these are things that LLMs actually do a somewhat decent job of, ingesting a wide variety of input info, and essentially transforming it into a compelling narrative.
This is why so many CEOs and C suite are so enamored with, and impressed by 'AI':
Its a better version of what they do, which is essentially professional gaslighting.
C suite tend to be sociopathic narcissists.
This is just literally a verified and studied fact.
So, the sociopathic narcissists are impressed by an automagic gaslighting machine, that is often actually more factually corrrect than they are... but of course the actual facts don't matter to a narcissist, what matters is accomplishing their will.
This is a big part of why they genuienly do not understand why everyone else doesn't 'appreciate' AI the way they do.
They're out of touch, delusional, by way of narcissism.
in idiocracy the AI replaced any and all bosses int he future, that includes ceos.
Why is this framed as if it's in any way surprising?
has carved out an image for himself as one of the preeminent AI whisperers of our age
Has he? The only things I ever read about him are that he's a dunce with too much money at his disposal.
a shortage of expertise that becomes obvious when the CEO mixes up basic AI terms.
Is that why he thinks the acronym "GPT" is a trademark that belongs to his company, even though it existed before they did?
It makes a lot of sense if you consider the article takes the POV of an incredibly gullible invester with lots of fear of missing out.
Why do people think that the CEO is like the "best employee" at what the company does?? No CEO at any company I've ever worked at has had a basic understanding of the work that I did. They understand "the business" but aren't the ones doing implementation.
And that's "fine" - we have different jobs. Theirs, apparently, has been worth millions of times what I do though...
I have a CEO that I respect. I'm in an engineering heavy company and the CEO is anything but that, and he knows it. His background is finance and that's most of his job, and interfacing with government. He delegates effectively and does not insert himself in technical decisions. The one thing he does do is ask a lot of questions. In some respect he doesn't care what the answer is, but he wants to know that we've considered all the angles before he takes our advice. I've been pulled in to a boardroom before because something was on his mind that he wanted to share. One occasion he told me to think about it. He didn't want me to follow up with him, but when it came up at a board meeting he wanted the COO to have an answer, so he was flagging the issue for me. Good guy.
This is what a CEO is supposed to do. They are the glue between every department and are supposed to make sure that everyone is on the same page. They ask "what is needed for us to get to this point and how can I help". They leave all functional details to the subject matter experts. They act as guide rails and do not derail the train.
Good CEOs understand that they are worth less than their employees because without their expertise and domain knowledge the CEO has no product to sell.
It's not surprising.
There are brain damaged people out there who still think Elon Musk is a good engineer.
Altman is just another tech bro dropout who never completed anything, similar to Musk.
But the skills required to be a CEO are that of a skilled manipulator, why would a CEO waste time coding when he can hire meatbags to do that? The nature of US startups benefits con artists and bullshit artists, because the VC money community is not the STEM community.
Least surprising thing I've read about him
Having been in Tech in the last Tech Boom and also in this later one (I was even in Startups some years ago), I can tell you that whilst the previous one was mainly driven by Techies wanting do cool things, this one is entirely driven by grifters with backgrounds in areas like Finance and Marketing.
The present generation of Startup Founders are almost never Technically skilled, rather they're skilled at Salesmanship (most notably, Pitching) and they don't dream of cracking some complex problem, they dream about making a lot of money via an Exit Strategy.
The only surprising thing about Altman not understanding Technology in depth is people being surprised by it.
has carved out an image for himself as one of the preeminent AI whisperers of our age,
The media keeps glazing him, because he keeps spending money on PR firms so that happens
If everyone keeps saying a capitalist CEO is a once in a life super genius....
The reason is so people invest in that company, not that the CEO is actually intelligent.
It's the same shit Musk went thru, so people have no excuse falling for it again.
This guys a fucking psycho for real. Another robot man with too much money for his own good, or anyone’s good, really.
Elon 2.0
Elon presents himself as an elite coder and tech savant, and it sounds like his teams have to work around his hubris to prevent him from damaging things. I don’t know how Altman presents himself. More important to understand what your role is. His seems to be manipulating Trump, raising money, and evangelizing AI.
The good thing he does for their engineer team in general is to be willing to use a white sheet design and not be forced to use legacy shuttle components.
I think a good CEO should strive to understand as much of a business he runs as possible. But the larger the company the more I find that it's common that the CEO actually is NOT skilled in the fields most integral to the company's success.
AMD has Lisa Su, but that seems like an exception more than a rule.
I don't expect a CEO to do any coding. I also don't expect a CEO to be as much of an expert as the PhD level computer scientists, machine learning experts, professors of psychology, neurology, ethics, etc., that his company is employing. It is not possible or even relevant for him to have those skills to the level of the top academics that work for him.
A CEO who is clueless about their organization’s nature is at an enormous disadvantage. I think it is too common now. Part of the reason so much sucks ass
I expect any CEO to be a worthless chode that has stepped on everyone en route to the top.
Exactly, that's AI's job.
Are you a Boeing executive, by any chance?
The way I see it, people pushing for AI and robots are the unskilled billionaires who don't want to pay the skilled for their work. Billionaires are useless.
I heard that Bezos can barely drive a delivery truck, too.
I mean come on, is it really a surprise that the role of CEO is so detached from the actual workings of a company? That's why CEOs can just hop companies without working their way up from the bottom. The role rarely has anything to do with the product or service.
OMD! I could be rich!
Anyone can be rich if born to the right parents.