8. OpenAI is where it is today due to its many brilliant researchers and engineers working passionately for a mission. OpenAI is nothing without its people. It cannot be successful if it keeps eroding trust and bleeding talent.

7. Sam has been very successful raising money, but he is not unique in this regard. He has had *multiple* former employees—scientists without his business background—raise billions of dollars for competing AI startups.

6. The number of high-level executives that leave OpenAI is not normal. This is a glaring failure of @sama's leadership. When I left, I told executives that it was going to be very hard to recruit and retain top talent because people do not trust Sam. I stand by this.

5. People talk about last November as an attempted coup by the board to oust Sam. This is how it was discussed internally. But this is exactly wrong; the board had every right to fire Sam. Instead, it was a successful coup by Sam to undermine the board, which is now complete.

4. The board's actions may not have been wise in their execution or their timing, but they were 100% correct in their assessment of Sam Altman.

3. It is exceedingly clear that @sama is a danger to OpenAI's non-profit mission. OpenAI's non-profit board thought so, so last year they tried to fire him. They failed, Sam got rid of most of the people who opposed him, and now he's trying to dissolve the board entirely.

2. Therefore, you should not believe OpenAI when it promises to do the right thing later. This has been obvious for a long time.

1. OpenAI was structured as a non-profit, but it acted like a for-profit. The non-profit mission was a promise to do the right thing when the stakes got high. Now that the stakes are high, the non-profit structure is being abandoned, which means the promise was ultimately empty.

I want to say some things about OpenAI's most recent tumultuous week. By this point this should all be obvious to everyone, but for some reason it's not. Nothing about this requires my insider's perspective. (0/8).

OpenAI is full of thoughtful, dedicated, mission-driven individuals, which is why I am hopeful that OpenAI and other labs will adopt this proposal. 8/8.

This is why I signed the letter at AI companies must create protected avenues for raising concerns that balance their legitimate interest in maintaining confidential information with the broader public benefit. 7/8.

AI is an emerging technology with few rules and regulations, so it is essential to protect employees who have legitimate concerns, even when there is no clear law that the company is breaking. 6/8.

With a technology as transformational as AGI, faltering in the mission is more than disappointing — it's dangerous. If this happens, the duty will fall first to individual employees to hold it accountable. 5/8.

I worry that the board will not be able to effectively control the for-profit subsidiary, and I worry that the for-profit subsidiary will not be able to effectively prioritize the mission when the incentive to maximize profits is so strong. 4/8.

OpenAI was founded as a non-profit, and even though it has a for-profit subsidiary, the for-profit was always supposed to be accountable to the non-profit mission. Over the last 6 months, my faith in this structure has significantly waned. 3/8.

I joined OpenAI because I wanted to help ensure that transformative AI technology transforms the world for the benefit of all. This is OpenAI's mission, and it's a mission that I strongly believe in. 2/8.

Last week was my final week working at OpenAI. This week I am signing a letter that calls upon frontier AI labs to support and protect employees who wish to speak out about AI risks and safety concerns. 1/8.

💔. It was an honor to work with Jan the past two and a half years at OpenAI. No one pushed harder than he did to make AGI safe and beneficial, and the company will be poorer without him.

RT @janleike: I think the OpenAI board should resign.