Cult of celebrity leads to tech chaos

Chaos.

That’s about as close as you can get to summing up the world of tech and artificial intelligence this past weekend — at least without using words we tend not to print in this newspaper.

The story, in the briefest of terms, is that the board of startup darling OpenAI, maker of ChatGPT, first fired CEO Sam Altman on Friday, sending the tech world into a complete tizzy … only to then hire him back by Tuesday night.

It is in many ways a tale that evokes the emerging tensions around artificial intelligence, not to mention the amount of intense attention and capital the subject’s gathering.

But in another sense, it’s also a cautionary tale of what happens when a company’s fortunes rest on the personality of a single individual — and what happens when companies let themselves become reliant on a cult of celebrity.

If you missed all this, you should probably just be glad. But for the masochists amongst you, a bit more context.

Artificial intelligence as a field is split roughly between those people who see it as central to the future of humanity and thus want it to be developed as quickly as possible, and those, on the other hand, often called “doomers,” who wish to proceed cautiously.

All of this is predicated on the idea that artificial intelligence will one day actually be intelligent — that is, it will not only think independently of its creators, it will do so with an intelligence far surpassing humanity.

Forget for a moment whether any of this is philosophically or technically sound. The point is there is an almost religious split between those who see AI as saviour and those who see is it as a potential devil.

It’s important because it’s necessary to understand why OpenAI as an organization is structured as a non-profit: that is, to ostensibly help it develop AI responsibly.

But according to the New York Times, tension had been brewing for some time between the board’s wish for the slow and steady, and Altman’s desire to move more quickly. Though details of exactly why are scarce, late last week, they decided to fire him.

Then, all hell broke loose. Reaction included an employee revolt, a claim from OpenAI investor Microsoft that it had hired Altman — that was later walked back, possibly to save Microsoft’s stock price from tanking Monday morning — all in addition to a huge amount of pressure from Silicon Valley bigwigs to fix the mess. Suddenly in a position of power, Altman discussed his return and he is now once again CEO — this time with a new board.

Given the level of consternation and outrage, one would imagine Altman was solely responsible for whether humanity one day has intelligent robot assistants or is instead left to scratch for bugs among the dirt.

But it wouldn’t take away from Altman’s many achievements, first as an entrepreneur and then as a venture capitalist, to say that he does not alone hold the future of technology in his hands. Altman is undoubtedly brilliant, and is a programmer by training. But the technology of ChatGPT was developed by many, often under the guidance of other high-level OpenAI employees with specializations in machine learning such as co-founder Ilya Sutskever and founding team member Wojciech Zaremba.

The point is this: Silicon Valley is in thrall to those it believes are geniuses, while the actual work of creating tech is something done by thousands of people.

In that sense, these tech celebrities are not geniuses who alone can guide us to the promised land; instead they are figureheads, there to act as mechanisms to marshal capital and discourse in service of their stated aims.

But when you attribute so much importance symbolic leaders, you are also dependent upon them. That’s where things can go wrong.

Consider Elon Musk. While it is impossible to deny his success with Tesla, his recent musings have shifted from merely odd to the outrageous and bigoted, and the brand identity of not just Twitter/X, but also Tesla, are greatly diminished as a result.

OpenAI may have escaped such a fate. But in a strange way, it has not only reasserted the “Great Man” theory of tech, it has also tied its future even more tightly to the actions and words of a single man: Sam Altman.

Leaders are important, even when symbolic. Think of a country at war: a great leader isn’t fighting battles, but they can act as something to gather around. That is often how great CEOs also work.

But the thing is, human beings are fickle. As the example of Musk shows, even the most brilliant people can have glaring, even offensive blind spots. What’s more, the very trappings of success can insulate individuals from both reality and consequence, creating the risk of a very dangerous echo chamber-inspired spiral.

Tie one’s organization to a solitary person, and a company sinks or swims with them — with their whims, their changing tastes and their careless remarks. In such a situation, can chaos ever really be far behind?