To be clear, I don’t think OpenAI could have raised what it raised as quickly as it did without him. But with the benefit of hindsight, Microsoft should have let the safety board fire him.
I'm curious what you're basing this on. Are you aware of any grumblings on the inside? From the outside it appears no different than before largely because it seems everybody knew he was a slippery dude anyways, but they tolerated it because he was slippery in ways that were profitable.
I also think he was prescient in his unquenching thirst for compute. Despite Anthropic possibly having a better product I think OpenAI will prevail simply because he's gone to extreme (sometimes diabolical, cf that DRAM deal) extents in ensuring they have enough compute.
Like, it's pretty likely that Claude's recent problems are due to insufficient compute. With 9's (and resultant loss in goodwill) comparable to GitHub, I actually have doubts they will be able to hit their projected ARR. OpenAI could win simply by dint of having capacity, which can be attributed to Altman's shenanigans.
Anthropic is currently raising tens of billions of dollars at a favourable valuation to fund infrastructure needs. From a shareholder perspective, that beats raising the capital ahead of demand.
> OpenAI could win simply by dint of having capacity, which can be attributed to Altman's shenanigans
If OpenAI is able to deny compute to Anthropic, yes. I'm not seeing any sign that OpenAI will be able to lock Anthropic out of the tech giants' clouds.
Not because he threatened OpenAI’s valuation. The idea that OpenAI might be worth more without Altman is still heretical talk.
> not sure if you didn't know
My three-sentence comment directly references it in the third.
More accurate to say the board I think.
