Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

As I read the statement in the article, he didn't claim he was the chairman of Y Combinator at the time he was actually President. He claimed was the chairman at the time of the filing, 2021:

"Mr. Altman is an entrepreneurial and thought leader with a proven track record of growth investing within the technology industry. He is also the co-founder and CEO of OpenAI, a leading AI research and deployment company, and the chairman of Y Combinator"

And as mentioned, "president" and "chairman" aren't fuzzy questions for the law. Saying you're one when you are the other is a lying, not "fudging a bit". Lying in generally, say at cocktail party, isn't against the law. But lying to the SEC is definitely a thing that can have penalties.

And, yes, the article takes an appropriate "why would you even do that?" tone since it seems unlikely he'd get some financial or other payoff for such behavior. The main impression it gives me is of a pathological level of hubris/ego. Like a manager who j-walks in front of cop on company time.



Lying is a very difficult burden to prove and requires meeting several criteria:

1. Intent to deceive, so it can't just be that the statement is false but that it was intentionally false as opposed to what is likely a mistake made by a third party. As was noted elsewhere, Sam was positioned to be Chairman of Y Combinator after stepping down as President, but that never happened. It's entirely possible that whoever wrote this did not become aware of that change in circumstances.

2. Reliance and harm. The false statement must be something that was or can be relied upon by potential investors that could cause them harm. It's possible an investor can rely on this fact but it would be very hard to demonstrate harm from it.

3. Materiality. The statement must be significant in that the information could sway a potential investor towards the investment. I'd say misstating credentials is material and so this element does count.

Taken altogether however, this does seem like a whole lot of nothing.


100% what I was going to say.

This is a just a misstatement. There's plenty of valid things to critique sama on, but this isn't one of them.


It’s a misstatement and most probably an oversight at worst. It’s only material if it affects people’s decisions in investing. Theres no material amount of prestige associated with a board position over an actual working position like ceo or president.


It can have penalties but most like not for a disclosures bio page of a spac.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: