Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
This is embarrassing for them. I can understand ousting a CEO, but the board needs to go into that and leave it with confidence. If I were an investor I’d be very nervous about the state of the company, this shows they are very unsure about the future of the company. I’d say no one is at the wheel right now
First of all, fuck profit and investors. If you want to do good, you have to disregard them.
Second, I’m pretty sure bringing him back was a push by Google, not the board exactly.
This gives me a lot more faith the company will stick to it’s guns and not turn into short-term profit seekers only. However, I don’t know if the new CEO is a good choice. They should have taken someone from a non-profit or something.
They still are. The nonprofit board that fired sam altman owns both the profit seeking venture and the entity responsible for controlling the profit venture. I haven’t dug deep enough to be sure who if anyone can oust the board
This is embarrassing for them. I can understand ousting a CEO, but the board needs to go into that and leave it with confidence. If I were an investor I’d be very nervous about the state of the company, this shows they are very unsure about the future of the company. I’d say no one is at the wheel right now
First of all, fuck profit and investors. If you want to do good, you have to disregard them.
Second, I’m pretty sure bringing him back was a push by Google, not the board exactly.
This gives me a lot more faith the company will stick to it’s guns and not turn into short-term profit seekers only. However, I don’t know if the new CEO is a good choice. They should have taken someone from a non-profit or something.
Rather push by Microsoft instead of Google?
Oh, yeah. It might be MS. Whichever one it is…
I mean I agree but shouldn’t they have stayed a nonprofit then?
They still are. The nonprofit board that fired sam altman owns both the profit seeking venture and the entity responsible for controlling the profit venture. I haven’t dug deep enough to be sure who if anyone can oust the board
Almost like it is not a for-profit company, and the investors interests are not a priority…
But why would they do such a thing? /s