AllYouCanTech

OpenAI’s Chief Technology Officer, Mira Murati, Reveals Surprising Exit

## Mira Murati’s Exit from OpenAI: A Significant Change in AI Governance

On Wednesday, Mira Murati, the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) at OpenAI, declared her resignation in an unexpected announcement made via the social media site X (previously known as Twitter). Having been with OpenAI since 2018, Murati has played a crucial role in the organization’s technological leadership for over six years. Her exit signifies a pivotal moment for OpenAI, a company that has led the charge in artificial intelligence (AI) development, especially in the areas of generative AI and ethical AI research.

### A Trailblazer’s Impact at OpenAI

During her time at OpenAI, Murati was instrumental in numerous groundbreaking milestones. As CTO, she oversaw the company’s technical vision and product innovation, contributing significantly to the launch and enhancement of some of OpenAI’s most recognized products, such as:

– **DALL-E**: An innovative AI model that creates images from textual descriptions, transforming the domain of AI-generated art.
– **Codex**: An AI engine that writes code, forming the backbone for GitHub Copilot and various coding tools.
– **Sora**: A highly realistic AI video generator, expanding the possibilities of media production.
– **ChatGPT**: The conversational AI solution that gained widespread acclaim, igniting broad discussions about the future of AI.

Murati also led the research and safety divisions at OpenAI, ensuring that the company’s AI systems were advanced while adhering to ethical practices. In her public engagements, she consistently underscored the necessity of responsible AI development, advocating for mindful consideration of AI’s societal effects.

### The Context of Murati’s Departure

Murati’s resignation occurs at a crucial turning point for OpenAI. The organization is allegedly restructuring its nonprofit division, with intentions to convert into a for-profit benefit corporation. This shift, according to reports from Reuters, would diminish the control of OpenAI’s nonprofit board and could place the company’s valuation at $150 billion. The restructuring would also permit OpenAI CEO Sam Altman to acquire equity in the company for the first time, marking a notable change in the governance paradigm.

In her letter of resignation, Murati extended her gratitude to Altman and OpenAI President Greg Brockman for their confidence and support, while also alluding to a desire for personal exploration. “After considerable contemplation, I have arrived at the challenging decision to depart from OpenAI,” she stated. “There’s never a perfect moment to leave a cherished place, yet this moment feels appropriate.”

Although Murati did not disclose her future plans, her departure prompts inquiries regarding the internal dynamics at OpenAI and the wider consequences for the company’s future trajectory.

### Celebrating Achievements in AI Safety and Research

In her farewell communication, Murati emphasized various recent strides at OpenAI, such as progress in speech-to-speech technology and the introduction of **OpenAI o1**, a novel reasoning AI model. She conveyed pride in the organization’s advancements in AI safety research, particularly in developing AI models that are more robust, aligned, and controllable.

Murati’s emphasis on safety and ethical principles has been a defining aspect of her leadership at OpenAI. She has been a strong proponent of ensuring that AI developments prioritize minimizing harm while maximizing societal advantages. Her departure leaves a noteworthy void in this essential facet of OpenAI’s mission, as the organization endeavors to advance toward artificial general intelligence (AGI)—a technological milestone capable of undertaking human-level cognitive tasks.

### A Phase of Leadership Changes at OpenAI

Murati’s resignation is the most recent in a series of prominent departures from OpenAI’s leadership cadre. In May 2024, **Ilya Sutskever**, the former Chief Scientist of OpenAI, exited to establish his own company, **Safe Superintelligence, Inc.** (SSI), aimed at creating AI systems that exceed human logical capabilities. Sutskever’s departure followed closely after his involvement in the controversial temporary removal of Sam Altman as CEO, an event that stirred significant upheaval within the organization in November 2023.

Furthermore, **John Schulman**, an OpenAI co-founder, departed earlier in 2024 to join competitor AI firm **Anthropic**, and in August, OpenAI President Greg Brockman declared he would be taking a temporary sabbatical until year-end.

These shifts in leadership have fueled speculation concerning the internal challenges faced by OpenAI as it pursues its ambitious objectives. Some critics have raised doubts about whether the organization’s push for AGI is generating discord among its senior leaders. In response to Murati’s resignation, **Benjamin De Kraker**, a developer at xAI, posed a thought-provoking question on X: “Why would key individuals depart from an organization right before it was poised to develop AGI? This is akin to resigning from NASA months before…”

Fivefold Rise in Fatal EEE Virus Cases Documented in New York; One Death Confirmed

### New York Confronts Rise in Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE) Incidents Amid Mosquito Boom

New York is presently dealing with an unexpected increase in mosquitoes that transmit the lethal Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE) virus, which has already led to a rare death and compelled state authorities to declare an “imminent threat” to public health. This year, the virus has been identified in mosquitoes across 15 counties, a notable rise from the usual two or three counties affected each year.

State Health Commissioner James McDonald underscored the seriousness of the issue, stating, “Eastern equine encephalitis is distinct this year.” He recommended that New Yorkers adopt precautions, such as utilizing insect repellents, donning long-sleeved attire, and eliminating stagnant water around residences to prevent mosquito breeding sites. McDonald also indicated that mosquitoes would continue to pose a danger until the area undergoes multiple nights of sub-zero temperatures.

On September 20, New York confirmed its first EEE-related fatality since 2015, occurring in Ulster County. This unfortunate incident prompted a Declaration of an Imminent Threat to Public Health, issued by McDonald, along with statewide preventive measures announced by Governor Kathy Hochul. The disease is exceptionally rare in New York, with just 12 recorded cases between 1971 and 2024, seven of which were deadly.

### What is Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE)?

EEE is an uncommon yet fatal mosquito-borne virus that mainly affects birds but can also infect humans and other animals, especially horses. The virus is most commonly found in the northeastern United States, typically appearing from mid-June to early October, before colder weather eliminates mosquito populations.

The virus is especially deadly for horses, with mortality rates reaching 90%. In humans, the illness is considerably rarer, with an average of only 11 cases reported annually in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Nonetheless, when the virus does infect people, the consequences can be severe. Approximately 4–5% of individuals bitten by an infected mosquito develop symptoms, and those who do are at high risk for serious illness or death.

### Symptoms and Risks

For individuals who develop EEE, the virus initially triggers nonspecific symptoms such as fever, headache, joint pain, nausea, and vomiting. In extreme cases, the virus can invade the brain, leading to encephalitis (inflammation of the brain), which may result in seizures, altered mental states, and other neurological issues. Children under 15 and adults over 50 are at the greatest risk of severe illness.

The death rate for severe EEE instances is around 30%, though this statistic can vary. For example, in Massachusetts, about 50% of EEE cases have resulted in death. Survivors of the illness frequently endure lasting neurological damage, and some may die within a few years due to complications. Presently, there is no vaccine or specific treatment for EEE, making prevention through mosquito control and personal protective strategies essential.

### Nationwide Context

While New York is witnessing an atypical surge in EEE-positive mosquitoes, the total number of cases across the U.S. remains relatively stable. As of this year, the CDC has recorded 10 cases from six states, including Massachusetts, Vermont, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and New Hampshire. The New York case would increase the total to 11, which aligns with the national average.

The death in New York marks the second confirmed EEE-related fatality in the U.S. this year. In August, New Hampshire reported the death of a previously healthy 41-year-old man from Hampstead, who succumbed to the virus. Massachusetts, which has recorded four EEE cases this year, even advised residents in certain towns to adhere to an evening curfew to diminish the risk of mosquito bites.

### Historical Perspective

EEE is an uncommon disease, but it has generated significant concern in recent times. The highest occurrence of cases in a single year took place in 2019, when 38 cases were documented across the U.S. From 2003 to 2023, the virus has remained rather rare, but its high mortality rate and serious long-term effects on survivors present a significant public health issue.

### Preventive Measures

Given the absence of a vaccine or specific treatment for EEE, prevention is critical. Health officials advise the following measures to lower the risk of mosquito bites:

1. **Use Insect Repellents**: Apply EPA-registered insect repellents containing DEET, picaridin, or oil of lemon eucalyptus.
2. **Wear Protective Clothing**: Donning long-sleeved shirts, long pants, and socks can minimize skin exposure to mosquitoes.
3. **Eliminate Standing Water**: Since mosquitoes breed in stagnant water, it’s important to remove any standing water around homes, like in flowerpots.

Cox Initiates Legal Action Against Rhode Island’s Broadband Development Strategy

### Cox Communications Takes Legal Action Against Rhode Island Over $108.7 Million Broadband Funding Initiative

Cox Communications has initiated a legal challenge to prevent Rhode Island’s strategy for allocating $108.7 million in federal funds earmarked for enhancing broadband access throughout the state. The lawsuit, lodged in Providence’s Superior Court, contends that Rhode Island’s broadband expansion strategy relies on inaccurate data and could unduly favor other Internet service providers (ISPs) in regions where Cox already delivers high-speed internet. This case has ignited a vigorous discussion regarding the distribution of federal broadband funds and whether Cox is attempting to suppress competition.

#### Overview: Federal Broadband Funding and Rhode Island’s Initiative

Rhode Island is poised to receive $108.7 million as part of the federal Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, a $42 billion effort aimed at enhancing broadband access nationwide. The program seeks to remedy underserved and unserved areas, guaranteeing that every American has access to high-speed internet.

The Rhode Island Commerce Corporation, a quasi-public entity, is tasked with executing the state’s broadband strategy. The agency has been formulating a plan to allocate the federal funds, which includes pinpointing areas lacking adequate high-speed internet service. According to the Commerce Corporation, the strategy was crafted through a transparent and inclusive process, involving input from multiple stakeholders.

Nonetheless, Cox, the foremost ISP in the state, asserts that the data utilized to identify underserved areas is faulty. Specifically, Cox claims that Rhode Island depended on imprecise speed test data to categorize specific regions as underserved, despite the fact that Cox already offers high-speed internet in those areas.

#### The Legal Challenge: Cox’s Arguments

Cox’s lawsuit focuses on the state’s employment of Ookla speed test data to ascertain which areas qualify for federal broadband assistance. The Commerce Corporation relied on Ookla’s speed test outcomes to identify locations where internet speeds dip below the federal minimum of 100 Mbps for downloads and 20 Mbps for uploads. Cox argues that this approach is unreliable, as speed test outcomes can be influenced by aspects such as the user’s home network, device age, and the quantity of devices connected at once.

Cox also contends that the state redefined several areas as underserved based on speed test data that did not correspond to particular locales. The company claims that around 30,000 locations it services were improperly labeled as underserved, making them candidates for federal funding that could instead benefit competing ISPs.

Within its lawsuit, Cox contends that the process established by the Commerce Corporation for contesting these classifications is excessively onerous. The company claims that it would have to perform hundreds of thousands of speed tests across its service areas to dispute the state’s conclusions, a task it describes as logistically unfeasible.

Cox is petitioning the court for an order to prevent the state from utilizing the existing broadband map and to permit the company to submit data concerning a smaller portion of its customers to contest the state’s classifications.

#### Rhode Island’s Stance: Defending Its Approach

The Rhode Island Commerce Corporation has robustly defended its broadband strategy, labeling Cox’s lawsuit as “misleading and unsupported by facts.” The agency maintains that Cox had significant opportunities to engage in the public planning process but opted not to participate meaningfully.

As per the Commerce Corporation, Cox failed to provide public feedback on the BEAD program’s design and did not voice any concerns during Broadband Advisory Council meetings. The agency also asserts that Cox chose not to disclose its network map details throughout the state’s 90-day Broadband Map Challenge Process.

“Let’s be clear about what’s behind Cox’s lawsuit: It is an attempt to prevent the investment of $108.7 million in broadband infrastructure in Rhode Island, likely because it realizes that some, or even all, of that money may be awarded through a competitive process to other Internet service providers,” the Commerce Corporation stated.

The agency further contests Cox’s assertion that the state is employing erroneous data. It claims that the strategy combines Federal Communications Commission (FCC) data with local speed test results, painting a more precise picture of broadband availability within the state.

#### The Influence of Ookla Speed Tests: A Disputed Issue

A major source of disagreement in the lawsuit is the use of Ookla speed test data. Ookla is a leading platform for measuring internet speeds, but Cox argues that its data cannot be deemed reliable enough to determine if an area is underserved. The company points out that various factors, including the user’s home network configuration and the number of devices connected, can distort the results.

Despite these concerns, Ookla’s publicly accessible data indicates that Cox’s network in Rhode Island surpasses the federal speed benchmark. According to Cox, Ookla’s Speedtest Global Index for April 2024 revealed that Cox recorded the highest median download speeds in the state, at 264.94 Mbps—more than double the threshold set by the Commerce Corporation.

Cox also asserts that the Commerce Corporation

FTC Directs DoNotPay to Compensate $193K for Deceptive Assertions Regarding Unverified AI Attorney

### The Ascension and Decline of DoNotPay: The “Automated Attorney” That Deceived Consumers

In the swiftly changing realm of artificial intelligence (AI), few developments have garnered public interest like **DoNotPay**, a startup that labeled itself as “the world’s pioneering automated attorney.” Originally launched in 2015 to assist users in disputing parking violations, DoNotPay rapidly broadened its offerings, alleging support in over 200 legal areas, ranging from contract disputes to divorce agreements. Nevertheless, recent undertakings by the **Federal Trade Commission (FTC)** have uncovered that the firm’s assertions were largely misleading, culminating in a settlement and a wider crackdown on false AI advertising.

#### The FTC’s Measures Against DoNotPay

On **Wednesday, September 2024**, the FTC revealed it had initiated action against DoNotPay for asserting false claims concerning its AI capabilities. The company promoted that its AI chatbot could execute legal tasks comparable to those of a human attorney, despite lacking any testing to substantiate these claims. According to the FTC, DoNotPay also neglected to hire or consult with any lawyers to verify the legal counsel generated by its AI.

Under the settlement terms, DoNotPay consented to pay **$193,000** and inform consumers who subscribed from 2021 to 2023 about the limitations of its legal services. Additionally, the company is barred from making future assertions that its AI can substitute professional legal assistance without adequate proof.

#### The Misleading Advertising Behind DoNotPay

DoNotPay’s promotional strategy significantly contributed to its swift expansion. The company employed bold statements and deceptive advertisements to draw in customers. One of the most notorious instances cited by the FTC involved a quote allegedly from the **Los Angeles Times** that lauded the service, claiming, “what this automated attorney can achieve is astonishingly similar—if not superior—to what human attorneys accomplish.” However, the FTC uncovered that this quote originated from a high school student’s opinion piece published on the **Los Angeles Times’ High School Insider** platform, a site for user-generated content targeted at youth.

Beneath these misleading advertisements, DoNotPay’s legal services were primarily powered by an API linked to **OpenAI’s ChatGPT**, a chatbot trained to identify relationships between words but not on a comprehensive collection of federal and state laws. The FTC discovered that DoNotPay had not assessed the quality or accuracy of the legal documents produced by its service, nor had it engaged any attorneys to supervise the AI’s output.

#### The Formation and Growth of DoNotPay

DoNotPay originated as a complimentary service designed to assist users in challenging parking tickets, a fairly straightforward legal task. However, its founder, **Joshua Browder**, swiftly broadened its focus, asserting that the service could manage a vast array of legal issues. By 2018, Browder acknowledged to the **ABA Journal** that the service operated without any lawyer supervision, although he expressed only slight concern regarding possible lawsuits for unauthorized practice of law. At the time, Browder believed that since the service was free, it could evade legal challenges.

In 2019, DoNotPay began charging users **$36 every two months**, and its marketing tactics grew more aggressive. The company proclaimed that its AI could tackle intricate legal matters, including drafting demand letters, submitting small claims, and even aiding with job discrimination grievances. However, as the company expanded, so did the scrutiny of its services.

#### Legal Troubles and Controversies

By 2022, DoNotPay had received a cease-and-desist notice from the **California Bar**, which protested the company’s assertions that it was the “world’s first automated attorney.” Although DoNotPay consented to cease using this terminology, the FTC discovered that the company continued to make similar claims, resulting in additional legal actions.

In 2023, DoNotPay was hit with a lawsuit from a user named **Jonathan Faridian**, who contended that the service had delivered “subpar” legal documents. Faridian’s case underscored the rising discontent among some users, who perceived the AI-generated legal advice as insufficient. Browder dismissed the lawsuit as an attempt by a notable class-action firm to “intimidate” DoNotPay, yet the case contributed to the growing legal pressure on the company.

Arguably the most ambitious—and controversial—moment in DoNotPay’s timeline occurred in 2023 when Browder declared plans for the “automated attorney” to represent a client in court to contest a traffic violation. However, after receiving threats from state bar prosecutors, Browder abandoned the initiative, fearing potential jail time for unauthorized legal practice.

#### The Outlook for AI in Legal Services

The FTC’s action against DoNotPay is part of a larger initiative to regulate misleading AI claims. As part of its **”Operation AI Comply”**, the FTC has taken enforcement measures against various AI firms that have misrepresented their products’ capabilities. **FTC Chair Lina Khan**