At this point I’m pretty sure their strategy is to take the hit in search engine quality since they have a stranglehold there anyway, and spam everyone with AI so they can come out ahead on that front with Human feedback. It’s pretty shitty, and the exact reason we would be taking down big tech monopolys.

It’s a dream I considered many times. It can be cheaper* than land life.

I was thinking more trying to avoid lawsuits based on further cementing their monopoly in adspace.

Being the world’s leading advertiser and the only browser 90% of people use gives them way too much control. There’s no path to privacy with chrome that doesn’t end with Google as the sole gatekeeper. I mean, they already are the gatekeeper, but the current rate of lawsuits seems like an acceptable cost of doing business.

Excuse me but, the fuck is wrong with you?

The reason that makes the most sense in one of the articles I’ve read is that they fired him after he tried to push out one of the board members.

Replacing that board member with an ally would have cemented control over the board for a time. They might not have felt his was being honest in his motives for the ousting, so it was basically fire now, or lose the option to fire him in the future.

Edit: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/21/technology/openai-altman-board-fight.html