Ilya Sutskever's Explosive Testimony Reveals Internal Chaos Behind Sam Altman's OpenAI Ouster

Chaos and lies: Why Sam Altman was booted from OpenAI, according to new testimony

"What did Ilya see?" Two years ago, it was the meme seen 'round the world (or at least 'round the tech industry). OpenAI CEO Sam Altman had been briefly ousted in November 2023 by members of the company's board of directors, including his longtime collaborator and fellow cofounder Ilya Sutskever. The board claimed Altman "was not consistently candid in his communications with the board," undermining their confidence in him. He was out for less than a week before being reinstated after hundreds of employees threatened to resign. But observers wondered: What hadn't Altman been candid about? And what led Sutskever to turn against him? Now, new details have come to light in a legal deposition involving Sutskever, part of Musk's ongoing lawsuit against Altman and OpenAI. For nearly 10 hours on October 1st, bookended by repeated sniping between Musk's and Sutsever's attorneys, Sutskever answered questions about the turmoil around Altman's ouster, from conflicts between executives to short-lived merger talks with Anthropic. He testified that from personal experience and documentation he'd viewed, he'd seen Altman pit high-ranking executives against each other and offer conflicting information about his plans for the company, telling people what they wanted to hear. The testimony paints a picture of a leader who could be manipulative and chameleon-like in the relentless pursuit of his own agenda -- though Sutskever expressed hesitation about his reliance on some of the secondhand accounts later in testimony, saying he "learned the critical importance of firsthand knowledge for matters like this." OpenAI did not provide an on-the-record comment by publication time, but after an investigation conducted by the company wrapped up, board chair Bret Taylor said in 2024 that "We have unanimously concluded that Sam and Greg are the right leaders for OpenAI." Sutskever co-founded OpenAI with Altman and others after he left Google in 2015, which awarded him a seat on the board and a place in the C-suite as the company's chief scientist. But by 2023, he'd become a chronicler of dissatisfaction with Altman. In the deposition he said that either one or all three of OpenAI's independent board members at the time had asked him, after having discussions about executives' concerns about Altman, to prepare a collection of screenshots and other documentation. So he did -- and he sent the 52-page memo to board members Adam D'Angelo, Helen Toner, and Tasha McCauley. When asked why he didn't send it to Altman, Sutskever said, "Because I felt that, had he become aware of these discussions, he would just find a way to make them disappear." He also said that he had been waiting to propose Altman's removal for "at least a year" before it happened. Sutskever said he sent a separate memo detailing concerns about OpenAI president Greg Brockman. The memos were sent in the form of disappearing emails, but "various lawyers" have a copy of both, according to the deposition. The crux of Sutskever's issues was that Altman "exhibits a consistent pattern of lying, undermining his execs, and pitting his execs against one another." That's a quote from the very first page of the memo he sent about Altman, which lawyers read aloud during the deposition. When it came to "pitting people against each other" at OpenAI, Sutskever's 52-page memo contained a lot of receipts, though there are limited details in the deposition itself. He said that Altman told both him and Jakub Pachocki, who is now OpenAI's chief scientist, "conflicting things about the way the company would be run," setting the two at odds and undermining Sutskever on multiple occasions -- though the deposition transcript doesn't contain the details of what Altman allegedly said. Another example of this, according to Sutskever, was that Altman didn't take a firm position when former OpenAI research executive Dario Amodei -- who is now CEO of rival Anthropic -- wanted to run "all of research at OpenAI" and have Brockman fired. Sutskever said he faulted Altman for "not accepting or rejecting" Amodei's conditions, implying that Altman was playing both sides of the situation to see which would better come out in his favor. Sutskever also detailed claims from former OpenAI CTO Mira Murati that Altman had pitted her and Daniela Amodei, then an OpenAI research executive, against each other. There weren't additional details contained in the deposition, but the rivalry between the Amodeis and certain OpenAI executives is well-documented: Daniela and her brother Dario left OpenAI to co-found Anthropic on the basis of differing values. Sutskever said in the deposition that Murati had provided him with various screenshots and documentation of conversations, including a text message conversation between Altman and Brockman. He also said Murati had surfaced claims that Altman left his leadership role at Y Combinator for, according to the memo, "similar behaviors. He was creating chaos, starting lots of new projects, pitting people against each other, and thus was not managing YC well." To Sutskever, this all added up to evidence that Altman couldn't be trusted to lead the foremost developer of such a powerful technology, and his concerns grew over the course of at least a year. Y Combinator did not respond to a request for comment by publication time. At this point, many of Sutskever's claims don't come as a surprise. In May 2024, former board member Toner said publicly that Altman had systematically concealed important information about OpenAI. Altman didn't disclose to the board that he owned the OpenAI startup fund, she alleged, which could have presented a conflict of interest. He allegedly gave "inaccurate information" about the company's "small number of formal safety processes." When OpenAI released ChatGPT, she said, the board found out about it for the first time on Twitter. "For years, Sam had made it really difficult for the board to actually do [its] job by withholding information, misrepresenting things that were happening at the company, in some cases outright lying to the board," she said. While Altman attempted to explain away individual issues, the breaches of trust piled up. "All four of us who fired him came to the conclusion that we just couldn't believe things that Sam was telling us, and that's just a completely unworkable place to be in as a board -- especially a board that is supposed to be providing independent oversight over the company, not just helping the CEO to raise more money." Toner mentioned on a podcast appearance that a month before Altman's ouster, board members had talked with two executives who showed them a range of evidence documenting concerning interactions with Altman, saying that he had created a toxic workplace and that they could not trust him in his role. She didn't name the two executives at the time, but it stands to reason that the two were Sutskever and Murati. "They used the phrase 'psychological abuse,' telling us they didn't think he was the right person to lead the company to AGI, telling us they had no belief that he could or would change," Toner said at the time. The period of chaos after Altman's removal didn't improve Sutskever's opinion of him. According to the deposition, during Altman's ouster, Anthropic reached out with a proposal to merge with OpenAI and take over leadership of the company. "I recall Anthropic expressing their excitement about it and expressing the issue -- the practical challenges that they would have with it," Sutskever said, adding that the discussions were brief and that the merger didn't move forward due to the practical challenges. He said that both Dario and Daniela Amodei were on the call. Toner weighed in on the matter on X earlier this week, noting that the proposal was only on the table for a brief period. After Altman's ouster, not only did the makeup of the board transform with exits and new additions, but also, certain executive relationships seemed strained at best. Sutskever technically remained an employee of the company for six months but seemed not to have a significant role; he then left to start his own rival company, Safe Superintelligence (SSI). A few months after Sutskever's departure, Murati left as well, later announcing her own rival AI startup, Thinking Machines Lab. On the same day as Murati's exit, Bob McGrew, the company's chief research officer, and Barret Zoph, its vice president of research, also departed. McGrew was one of the people Sutskever named in his memo, suggesting it would be beneficial for the board to speak with him about Altman's concerning behavior. In his deposition, Sutskever said he hadn't spoken with Altman in 10-12 months and hadn't spoken with Brockman in 15 months or so, but that he believed OpenAI was likely paying his legal fees -- Sutskever said he wasn't sure who was paying them, as he hadn't received any kind of bill, but that "I don't know who else it would be." He also said he retained a financial interest in OpenAI and that the value of it had increased since he left. The amount of money at stake here, as well as the legal fees changing hands in such a drawn-out lawsuit, means that we'll likely see more depositions made public with more information about the way Altman ran OpenAI before his ouster. Sutskever's own deposition raised just as many questions as it did provide answers, especially with multiple parts missing from the record or having been redacted. But it's a window into one of the most dramatic leadership changes in modern-day tech -- and into the psychology of the people at the helm of one of the most powerful companies in the world today. Near the end of his testimony, Sutskever was asked to confirm whether he thought OpenAI employees would be happy about Altman's ouster. "I had not expected them to cheer," he said. "But I [had] not expected them to feel strongly either way."

Ilia Sutskever Breaks Silence on Altman Firing : The Untold Backstory Revealed

What really happens behind the closed doors of one of the world's most influential AI organizations? The recent revelations by Ilia Sutskever, a co-founder of OpenAI, have pulled back the curtain on a saga of internal power struggles, controversial decisions, and fractured leadership. From the shocking ousting of CEO Sam Altman to the boardroom battles that nearly derailed the organization, Sutskever's testimony exposes a side of OpenAI few could have imagined. For a company tasked with shaping the future of artificial intelligence, these revelations raise unsettling questions: Can OpenAI balance its mission-driven goals with the messy realities of leadership and governance? And what does this turmoil mean for the future of safe AI development? In this report by Matthew Berman learn more about the key moments and conflicts that have defined OpenAI's leadership crisis. You'll uncover the behind-the-scenes tensions that led to Altman's brief dismissal, the controversial decisions of OpenAI's board, and the high-stakes merger proposal that added fuel to the fire. But the drama doesn't stop there, Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI introduces yet another layer of complexity, challenging the organization's ethical and legal foundations. Through Sutskever's deposition, we gain rare insight into the fragile dynamics of a company at the forefront of technological innovation. As the dust settles, one question lingers: How does OpenAI move forward from here? At the heart of the deposition lies Sutskever's dissatisfaction with Sam Altman's leadership. Sutskever accused Altman of fostering internal divisions, undermining executives, and engaging in political maneuvering. These concerns were formalized in a detailed 52-page memo prepared at the request of independent board members. The memo outlined specific grievances and called for Altman's removal, describing his leadership style as both destabilizing and overly aggressive. The situation escalated when the board, led by independent members Adam D'Angelo, Helen Toner, and Tasha McCauley, decided to terminate Altman's role as CEO. This decision, however, triggered widespread backlash from employees, industry stakeholders, and external observers. The fallout exposed significant vulnerabilities in OpenAI's governance structure and decision-making processes, raising questions about the organization's ability to manage internal crises effectively. The deposition also revealed the extent to which leadership conflicts can disrupt organizational focus. Sutskever's testimony painted a picture of a divided leadership team, where competing visions for OpenAI's future created friction and hindered progress. These internal struggles underscore the importance of cohesive leadership in maintaining stability and advancing the organization's mission. Sutskever's testimony shed light on the critical role of OpenAI's board in shaping the organization's leadership trajectory. Independent board members played a pivotal role in Altman's firing, but their decision-making process came under scrutiny for being rushed and poorly executed. Helen Toner's controversial assertion, that dismantling OpenAI could align with its mission if necessary, added fuel to the debate, raising concerns about the board's priorities and expertise. The deposition highlighted the challenges of balancing OpenAI's mission-driven goals with effective governance. The board's apparent lack of experience in managing high-stakes decisions became a focal point of criticism. This lack of preparedness not only undermined confidence in the board's ability to lead but also exposed deeper issues within OpenAI's governance model. The fallout from these decisions emphasized the need for a more structured and transparent governance framework. For an organization tasked with developing safe and beneficial AI, the ability to navigate internal and external challenges with clarity and decisiveness is critical. The events surrounding Altman's dismissal and reinstatement serve as a cautionary tale about the risks of governance missteps in high-stakes environments. Learn more about OpenAI with the help of our in-depth articles and helpful guides. Amid the leadership crisis, Anthropic, a rival AI organization founded by former OpenAI employees, proposed a merger. This proposal introduced a new dimension to the unfolding drama, further complicating the situation. While some board members viewed the merger as a strategic opportunity, Sutskever strongly opposed it, arguing that it posed a threat to OpenAI's independence and mission. The merger proposal underscored the competitive and interconnected nature of the AI industry. It also highlighted the difficulty of maintaining focus on safe AI development while managing external pressures and internal discord. For OpenAI, the proposal raised questions about how to balance collaboration with competitors against the need to preserve its autonomy and mission-driven goals. Sutskever's opposition to the merger reflected broader concerns about the potential dilution of OpenAI's vision. His stance emphasized the importance of safeguarding the organization's core principles, even in the face of external opportunities that might offer short-term benefits. This episode serves as a reminder of the challenges inherent in navigating the complex landscape of the AI industry. Sam Altman's dismissal proved to be short-lived. Within a week, he was reinstated as CEO following widespread employee backlash and the resignation of several board members. The deposition revealed the depth of employee loyalty to Altman, who was widely regarded as a unifying figure critical to maintaining morale and direction within the organization. Altman's return marked a significant turning point for OpenAI. However, it also left lingering questions about the effectiveness of its governance model and the long-term stability of its leadership structure. The events surrounding his reinstatement highlighted the importance of aligning leadership decisions with the organization's broader mission and values. The reinstatement also underscored the role of employee sentiment in shaping organizational outcomes. The strong support for Altman among OpenAI's workforce demonstrated the critical importance of leadership in fostering a sense of unity and purpose. For OpenAI, the episode served as a reminder of the need to prioritize internal cohesion in the pursuit of its mission. Adding to the complexity of the situation, Elon Musk filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging illegal practices during its transition from a nonprofit to a for-profit entity. Musk's claims centered on the nonprofit's continued control over the for-profit subsidiary, raising ethical and legal concerns about the organization's structural evolution. The lawsuit highlighted broader tensions between OpenAI's profit-driven goals and its original nonprofit mission to develop safe and beneficial AI. Musk's allegations brought renewed attention to the ethical and legal challenges associated with balancing financial growth with a commitment to public interest. For OpenAI, the lawsuit served as a stark reminder of the need to maintain transparency and accountability in its operations. The deposition of Ilia Sutskever offers a detailed account of the challenges faced by OpenAI during a period of significant internal turmoil. From leadership conflicts and board dynamics to external pressures and legal disputes, the testimony highlights the complexities of managing a mission-driven AI organization. Key lessons from this episode include the importance of robust governance, ethical leadership, and a clear focus on organizational stability. For OpenAI, these lessons will likely shape its approach to navigating future challenges in the pursuit of safe and beneficial AI development. As the AI industry continues to evolve, the events surrounding Sutskever's deposition serve as a valuable case study in the intricacies of leadership and governance in high-stakes environments.