While most of the interview is boring and nothing new has been said by Toner, to me, it feels like huge political fight where sama tried to overthrow her first and then Toner went in attack mode trying to overthrow him. It's clear she was the lead instigator and accidently found Illya as sympathetic co-conspirator. Board was obviously ok and took no action when they weren't informed about release of ChatGPT. It also didn't took action when sama didn't told them about startup fund. Only after Toner's paper and sama's move, all these became important.
Overall, I genuinely believe that the board needs to get out of way. They are not the founder, they are not even technical. They should do oversight for intentional and significant wrong doings but politics and brewing up secret coups is not their job.
My guess is that Mustafa wanted to sell to MSFT at 10X but MSFT didn’t wanted pay that kind of money. Mustafa was ok with fire sale but VCs were greedy. Mustafa then quite in rage.
They had raised massive amount and not from good patient investors. No traction means Mustafa got fired. This is not surprising though but what is surprising is MSFT picked him up. The guy is not technical, is not even visionary and had just got lucky hanging out with Demis. I would think Satya had better taste.
It is especially horrible for new Amazon employee because of their tiered stock vests. You might have left your great job because Amazon offered you half million signing bonus but you won't last long enough to get even 30% of that.
I have tried using LLamaIndex and APIs are just aweful. It's a nightmare of class hierarchies and abstractions that only author can wrap their heads around. Comments are basically useless classic style of rewriting the function name. Just look at this example:
def get_context(self, response: Response) -> List[Document]:
"""Get context information from given Response object using source nodes.
Most people don’t know some history. During 1990s, a group of people made a fortune out of consulting gigs where they will be called in by their CTO friends in traditional enterprises to save the late and over budget projects. One of these people was Kent Beck. Kent will use his license to kill to turn things around and eventually generalize his rescue formula and sell it to make 100X more. His crowning glory during those days was XP or eXtreme Programming.
Like with all self-help formulas, Kent will label his solution as magic bullet for all software development problems. He will advertise it as secret medicine that cures all ills. He will be at every conference, write articles after articles, publish books.
Also, like all magic self-help formulas, it wouldn’t quite work. So, Kent will invent something new. His next prescription was TDD and when I first saw it, I thought it was a joke. But people around me started drinking cool aid and if you didn’t join them then you weren’t one of them. Again, Kent and friends will go out on massive marketing spree advertising it as secret talisman. Like all overweight desperate people in need to lose weight, people will enthusiastically start new Kent Beck diet, lose few pounds and endorse the formula. But they will soon find that they had simply traded one problem for another more uglier one.
This went on for long time. For more than two decades, these group of people kept inventing these processes, selling it as magic pill and made millions upon millions in consulting gigs, books, training, certifications and so on. They came up with Agile and 17 people in that group created “agile manifesto”. Their most aggressively marketed prescription was scrum. Like their all previous prescription, world is finally coming off of night of drinking cool aid and feeling severe headache.
I think most of these people have now sort of retired after amassing massive fortunes and hopefully we will not see more of these magic processes pushed to dumb CTOs with promises of curing all ills.
The truth is Scrum was never a magic bullet and it is downright harmful for many projects. It is useful for highly predictable projects where research component is negligible, for example, CRUD websites AND where you are stuck with unmotivated tier-3 talent who failed to get job at insurance company. For everything else, it should never have been used. It is especially going to hurt creativity, originality and novelty if you are in business of making a differentiating unique novel product. It also is very very bad choice if you already had tier-1 highly motivated team.
Most people don’t know this but OpenAI is actually very dysfunctional company and only accidentally successfully because of just handful of right people having a rather lucky hunch (Schulman, Redcliff et al). However, execution wise they are really really poor. You can see this i myriad of problems such as their dataset is still stuck in 2022, plugins was a complete disaster, web browser mode sucks, app is poor, unable to release 32k and multimodal, rate limit even for paid users etc etc.
All thesis problems are now even more aggravated by their recent massive hiring spree of AI doomer crowd and Yudkowsky’s cult members instead of actually doing real research. Now the company is full of doomers whose sole job is to slow things down and be barrier to efforts. Meanwhile Bard has been making amazing progress. It’s free, doesn’t log you off all the time, it always feel latest and very close - if not better than current limited ChatGPT. Given OpenAI’s new staffing composition, they are unlikely to be leader down the road, especially when Gemini comes out. This is unfortunately sama’s second failed execution. He should probably just focus on investments.
Imagine you are running at 2 miles/hr and your competitor is doing 4 miles/hr. How much distance gap increases between two of you as time passes? The answer is secret to virtually all success in most companies which started as startup. In companies where people do 9-5 and competition where people sleep under desk, the gap grows tremendously. Yes, people burn out and they will be discarded and replaced with new blood but that’s how history is made, unfortunately. The 9-5 companies are exactly the target to be swept away by startups.
Sprints were actually invented for team and culture that is below average. The goal is to keep putting pressure while pretending not to do so. It works well on boring projects or subpar teams. If you did your recruiting right and didn’t end up in pointless projects then you don’t need sprint bullshit. A high powered team is typically self-motivated and can get things done without scrum master asking them what they were upto.
Another ex-colleague here. I was not going to participate in the discussions but your post made me realize objective truth should come out. I do believe she actually thinks she is making the world a better place but in reality any interaction with her has been incredibly stressful having to carefully weigh every move made in her presence. When this blows over her departure will be a net positive for the morale of the company.
To give a concrete example of what it is like to work with her I will describe something that has not come to light until now. When GPT-3 came out a discussion thread was started in the brain papers group. Timnit was one of the first to respond with some of her thoughts. Almost immediately a very high profile figure has also also responded with his thoughts. He is not Lecun or Dean but he is close. What followed for the rest of the thread was Timnit blasting privileged white men for ignoring the voice of a black woman. Nevermind that it was painfully clear they were writing their responses at the same time. Message after message she would blast both the high profile figure and anyone who so much as implied it could have been a misunderstanding. In the end everyone just bent over backwards apologizing to her and the thread was abandoned along with the whole brain papers group which was relatively active up to that point. She has effectively robbed thousands of colleagues of insights into their seniors thought process just because she didn't immediately get attention.
The thread is still up there so any googler can see it for themselves and verify I am telling the truth.
If employee is found using company resources inappropriately (in this case, mailing list to rant) then you can't give that employee 2 weeks notice. Google will then have to consider possibility that she will abuse their mailing lists.
Initially I took Google's side given Gebru has history of bullying so aggressively and has no qualms to play race/gender cards at every opportunity she gets. But now that more details (including the paper in question) has been revealed, it's hard to stay on Google's side. It is clear that the peer review process that Jeff Dean had described has been optional for all intent and purpose. It says along similar lines that right there on their internal website. Too many Googlers have attested that they have bypassed the process with no consequences. Gebru's paper itself has no real technical novelty. There was no reason to fire her. It doesn't seem out of line that Gebru was befuddled, frustrated and made a threat on the basis that she had right for the information. Jeff Dean could have easily offered her feedback and transparency in decision process. He could have agreed to let her make corrections later in the submission process. He did none of that and doesn't want to come out clean.
Having said that I still feel Gebru is extra-ordinarily self-entitled person. Few months ago she insisted that Jeff Dean take her side in Twitter feud she initiated. She has the mindset of either you are with me all the time or you are racist+misogynist. She complains about "micro agressions" towards her from everyone but she herself is super aggressive. When disagreement arise, she marks you down as enemy and launches attacks to destroy you completely with sole purpose of making you homeless, jobless and making sure your kids die of hunger. I wouldn't wish upon her as colleague to anyone. You might have right to disagree with me but this is what I have felt. I still take her side in this current episode nonetheless because I think she is on the right side.
Ultimately we are all playing opinion game here and only few people knows what really happened.
This has now become a pattern. Google throws resources on some execs whims, kills off competitors and after a while exec cashes out, thanks to their rewards system. The left over bunch then figures out that the thing is not as profitable so they must either kill off their own product or let it stagnate into oblivion. Customers now are left with dead bodies and long recovery period before investor fears wears off and replacements arrives. This scorched earth approach has left too many areas without good products, growth and investments.
Google Flights is destined to be on chopping block sooner or later. It has not much influence on core business and is not going to be wildly profitable. The problem is that by the time Google kills it, Kayak and other competitors would be forced in to unrecoverable comma or just outright killed off as well.
Overall, I genuinely believe that the board needs to get out of way. They are not the founder, they are not even technical. They should do oversight for intentional and significant wrong doings but politics and brewing up secret coups is not their job.