The world of AI experienced a frantic meltdown and sudden rebirth after the surprise sacking of OpenAI co-founder and CEO Sam Altman.

OpenAI is the parent of ChatGPT that runs with the benevolent tagline:

‘Creating safe Artificial General Intelligence that benefits all of humanity.’

Altman’s sacking triggered a pitchfork rebellion from employees and investors, who were justifiably panicked by the board’s decision. Greg Brockman – President and co-founder of OpenAI – was also demoted from the board. He quickly quit along with three senior researchers.

Little is known about what happened behind the scenes except a cryptic comment released by the board saying Altman was not ‘consistently candid in his communications’. Whatever that means.

The whole thing happened like the striking of a match – too fast for anyone to follow, including those involved. At the end of it, the rockstar of AI was left out in the cold.

There has been speculation – and that is all it is – that the board of OpenAI had been pondering its commitments regarding the safe development of AI in the wake of increasing global scrutiny and a little bit of customer nervousness. Chatbots might be the dunces of the digital world today, but they are toeing the water when it comes to replacing human jobs at the bottom of the food chain. Many wonder how long it will take AI to climb up the employment rungs… Government-organised talkfests in the UK, US, and Europe around the issue of the apocalyptic AI threat probably didn’t help.

Some have said it is possible the lofty ‘human’ mission of AI development may have clashed with commercial ambitions as the company rapidly gained influence propelled by Altman, who has no trouble strutting the world stage putting a friendly face on the slightly scary technological whirlwind.

No one has confirmed why the remaining members of the board, including presumably the third co-founder, ditched Altman.

The closest we got to an explanation came from Twitch co-founder and incoming OpenAI CEO Emmett Shear, who released a statement saying:

‘I took this job because I believe that OpenAI is one of the most important companies currently in existence. Before I took the job, I checked on the reasoning behind the change. The board did *not* remove Sam [Altman] over any specific disagreement on safety, their reasoning was completely different from that. I’m not crazy enough to take this job without board support for commercialising our awesome models.’

There do not appear to be any hard feelings, at least, publicly. Altman said on Twitter shortly after leaving:

‘I loved my time at OpenAI. It was transformative for me personally, and hopefully the whole world a little bit. Most of all I loved working with such talented people. Will have more to say about what’s next later.’

He followed this with:

‘I love you all. Today was a weird experience in many ways. But one unexpected one is that it has been sorta like reading your own eulogy while you’re still alive. The outpouring of love is awesome. One takeaway: go tell your friends how great you think they are.’

Microsoft is a major partner and has sunk over $12 billion into OpenAI. Shortly after the news broke they said they were ‘blindsided by the decision’ and learned of the drama ‘a minute’ before the world.

Altman certainly has his supporters, and it didn’t take long for him to be snaffled up … by none other than Microsoft.

Satya Nadella, Chairman and CEO of Microsoft Corporation, announced on Twitter that Sam Altman and Greg Brockman had joined Microsoft ‘to lead a new advanced AI research team’.

Considering the existing partnership, the situation has started to lean on the side of digital inbreeding.

Playful rival tech boss Elon Musk couldn’t help himself, replying to the thread containing these announcements: ‘Now they will have to use Teams!’

Almost immediately, the message of unity flowed from Altman.

‘We have more unity and commitment and focus than ever before. We are all going to work together some way or other, and I’m so excited. One team. One mission.’

And:

‘Satya and my top priority remains to ensure OpenAI continues to thrive. We are committed to fully providing continuity of operations to our partners and customers. The OpenAI/Microsoft partnership makes this very doable.’

Ilya Sutskever, the third co-founder of OpenAI, Tweeted:

‘I deeply regret my participation in the board’s action. I never intended to harm OpenAI. I love everything we’ve built together and I will do everything I can to reunite the company.’

Musk took a break from launching rockets to reply:

‘Why did you take such a drastic action? If OpenAI is doing something potentially dangerous to humanity, the world needs to know.’

The net result is that all roads lead to Microsoft.

The question you may be asking is, why does any of this matter? Why all this fuss over OpenAI and ChatGPT? Why should Australia care?

Albanese and the dreaded Digital ID. That’s why.

A month ago, Microsoft revealed their intention to spend $5 billion (AUD) on AI development within Australia, in particular, the training of 300,000 to ‘succeed in the digital economy’ in conjunction with cyber security. A fortune is being poured into creating an environment for … something. Albanese and Microsoft are nest-building, but what are they laying?

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese met with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella – who acquired Altman’s AI skills – in San Francisco last week during the APEC Economic Leaders Meeting. There is something wildly unnerving about watching presidents and prime ministers who would struggle to unlock their phones deciding the technological fate of the nation.

Discussed at the event was Australia’s investment with Microsoft in the field of AI, including engaging in AI trials for the public service and lots of mindless praise about making Australia a leader (aka guinea pig).

Chief among these discussions was the earlier establishment of the AI Taskforce jointly led by the DTA and the Department of Industry, Science, and Resources. It is meant to be focused on the safe and responsible use of AI by the Australian Public Service. It all sounds very sensible … except the lack of detail regarding what the regulation will actually be regulating.

The PR from Labor is all about making Australia a ‘world-leading digital economy’, statements that employ similar language to that of the Digital ID draft legislation which uses the excuse of the digital economy to justify the controversial and extremely dangerous implementation of Digital ID.

The DTA is one entity pushing Australia’s Digital ID. It has also been looking into ‘services and support for generative AI’ for government. And let us not forget that Microsoft was one of the major submissions for the Digital Identity Legislation along with other tech giants.

This leads us to ask the question, is Anthony Albanese making firm deals for Digital ID before the Australian public agree to it?

And if so, why all the cloak and dagger? When will we be given clarity on the overlap, if any, between AI and Digital ID?

It’s almost as if Albanese knows that Digital ID is more unpopular than his failed Voice referendum.

Digital polices are discussed in meaningless catchphrases and vague statements that tell us very little about a serious and life-changing era that is being ushered in largely without public consent.

The Australian public have had it with the government making society-altering decisions without permission, especially decisions that involve enormous corporate investment funded by the taxpayer.

Someone has to start asking Albanese tough questions about our digital future. That is, if anyone can find him.

Get 10 issues for just $10

Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for the next 10 magazine issues, plus full online access, for just $10.

SUBSCRIBE 10 issues for $10 REGISTER 3 articles a month

Already a subscriber? Log in