Given Mr Altman and OpenAI are at the forefront of the AI revolution, the sense of Succession-style chaos should concern us all.
Here’s everything we know – and why it matters.
Shock departure
Mr Altman’s sacking was announced in an unassuming OpenAI press release.
Coming just weeks after he’d represented the firm at the UK’s AI Safety Summit, and days after appearing at the company’s first conference for third-party developers, the timing was a shock.
Advertisement
The board was said to have “lost confidence” in him due to unspecified communications issues.
In this case, the board had meant just four people – including OpenAI’s chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, who had reportedly become concerned that Altman was prioritising company growth over AI safety.
Members five and six – Mr Altman himself and then-president Greg Brockman – opposed it but were outvoted.
“I loved my time at OpenAI,” Mr Altman posted on X as the news broke, describing it as “transformative”.
“Will have more to say about what’s next later.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:09
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman at summit
The immediate fallout
OpenAI made chief technology officer Mira Murati interim CEO.
But as hundreds of staff made their displeasure about Altman’s sacking known, she made attempts to secure his stunning return to stave off the revolt.
“OpenAI is nothing without its people,” many employees wrote together on X – including Ms Murati herself.
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
Mr Altman was reportedly keen on the idea of returning. His brother Jack, also a start-up CEO, of HR firm Lattice, warned his detractors they were “betting against the wrong guy”.
But by Sunday, Mr Altman and Mr Brockman had joined OpenAI investor Microsoft to lead an AI research team.
Bloomberg reported the tech giant’s CEO Satya Nadella was “furious” and blindsided about the ousting.
OpenAI responded by hiring Emmett Shear, the former boss of streaming site Twitch, as Mr Altman’s replacement.
But the sense of panic at OpenAI was obvious, as more than 500 employees signed a letter threatening to quit.
Nothing encapsulated the chaos more than Mr Sutskever signing, saying he “deeply regrets” the board’s decision.
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
Despite joining Microsoft, Mr Altman left the door open for a return to OpenAI.
The two companies were already closely aligned, with the Windows maker investing $10bn in it earlier this year and using its GPT tech to reinvent its Bing search engine and Office products.
According to tech news site The Verge, citing multiple sources, Mr Altman and Mr Brockman were willing to return to OpenAI if the board members who staged the coup walked away.
Mr Nadella told CNBC “it’s very, very clear something has to change around governance”.
“We’ll have a good dialogue with their board on that,” he said.
Mr Altman suggested he’d stay involved with OpenAI in some capacity, posting: “We are all going to work together some way or other, and I’m so excited.”
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
OpenAI announced his return “in principle” on Wednesday morning (UK time) – and Mr Altman seemed to have got his way.
The company said there would be a “new initial board” of Bret Taylor, Larry Summers, and Adam D’Angelo.
“We are collaborating to figure out the details. Thank you so much for your patience through this,” it added.
Mr Summers is a former US treasury secretary, while Mr Taylor – the new chair – co-created Google Maps.
Mr Brockman will also be returning to the company.
What happens now?
Mr Altman has suggested his return means he won’t be working at Microsoft after all.
Mr Nadella appeared fine with that, saying he was “encouraged” by the changes to OpenAI’s board.
Twitter
This content is provided by Twitter, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Twitter cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Twitter cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Twitter cookies for this session only.
As for the old board, Mr Sutskever may be hoping his quick change of tact keeps him on side.
And then there’s Mr Shear, who will go down in history as one of Silicon Valley’s shortest-lived CEOs.
The executive, a previously self-professed AI “doomer” who has warned of its existential threat to humanity, had claimed he was not told why Mr Altman was dismissed.
“I am deeply pleased by this result,” he said of Mr Altman’s return.
“I’m glad to have been a part of the solution.”
Image: ChatGPT launched in November 2022
Why the future of OpenAI matters
The San Francisco-based company has been around since 2015 and even then had some big names on its books, including Elon Musk.
He and Mr Altman were the first people on the board to guide the firm’s quest to develop “safe and beneficial” artificial general intelligence, which refers to super-powerful AI capable of outperforming humans in a number of tasks
But it wasn’t until November 2022 that OpenAI was thrust into mainstream attention thanks to ChatGPT, attracting more than 100 million users in just a few months.
With AI tipped to have a similarly transformative impact on the world as the Industrial Revolution, Mr Altman has been rubbing shoulders with some of the world’s most powerful politicians as he looks to help shape potential regulation.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:31
Will AI mean ‘no job is needed’?
Mr Altman hasn’t been shy of warning about the risks of AI, but is undoubtedly committed to pushing the boundaries and, perhaps more significantly to the drama of recent days, maximising its commercial potential.
The OpenAI developer conference he appeared at before his sacking was all about empowering third parties to leverage the firm’s GPT tech in their products – even building their own digital assistants.
And in September, the Financial Times reported ex-Apple designer Jony Ive was in talks with OpenAI to build the “iPhone of AI”.
Such projects would go against OpenAI’s non-profit origins. The firm launched a profit-focused arm in 2019, but it didn’t go down well with some of its original investors – including Musk, who quit.
Swapping Mr Altman for Mr Shear, who previously said he’s “in favour of slowing down” AI development, looked like a sign OpenAI wanted to return to its roots.
One thing we should all hope slows down is the drama surrounding Mr Altman’s employment – a saga not even ChatGPT could have written, and one that sent one of the world’s most influential companies into meltdown.
The US secretary of state has hailed a “tremendous amount of progress” on peace talks after the US and Ukraine delegations met in Geneva – but said that negotiators would “need more time”.
Marco Rubio said the meetings in Switzerland on Sunday have been “the most productive and meaningful” of the peace process so far.
He said the US was making “some changes” to the peace plan, seemingly based on Ukrainian suggestions, “in the hopes of further narrowing the differences and getting closer to something that both Ukraine and obviously the United States are very comfortable with”.
Mr Rubio struck an optimistic tone talking to the media after discussions but was light on the details, saying there was still work to be done.
Image: US secretary of state Marco Rubio in Geneva after peace talks with Ukraine. Pic: Reuters
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:08
Analysis: Rubio strikes an optimistic tone – but is light on detail
“I don’t want to declare victory or finality here. There’s still some work to be done, but we are much further ahead today at this time than we were when we began this morning and where we were a week ago for certain,” Mr Rubio said.
He also stressed: “We just need more time than what we have today. I honestly believe we’ll get there.”
Sky News’ defence analyst Michael Clarke said on the initial US-Russian 28-point peace plan that it was Donald Trump against the world, with maybe only Moscow on his side.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
9:21
Is Trump’s plan a ‘capitulation document’?
Mr Rubio praised the Ukrainian attitude towards the talks and said Mr Trump was “quite pleased” after he previously said in a social media post that Ukraine’s leaders had expressed “ZERO GRATITUDE” for US efforts.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his nightly address on Sunday that there are signs that “President Trump’s team hears us”.
In a news release on Sunday evening, the White House said the day “marked a significant step forward”.
“Ukrainian representatives stated that, based on the revisions and clarifications presented today, they believe the current draft reflects their national interests and provides credible and enforceable mechanisms to safeguard Ukraine’s security in both the near and long term,” it claimed.
Despite diplomatic progress in Geneva the finish line remains a long way off
We’ve witnessed a day of determined and decidedly frantic diplomacy in this well-heeled city.
Camera crews were perched on street corners and long convoys of black vehicles swept down Geneva’s throughfares as the Ukrainians worked hard to keep the Americans on side.
Secretary of state Marco Rubio did not want to go into details at a press “gaggle” held at the US Mission this evening, but he seemed to think they had made more progress in the last 96 hours than the previous 10 months combined.
The Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy also seemed satisfied enough, posting on Telegram that there were “signals President Trump’s team is hearing us” after a day of “numerous meetings and negotiations”.
That said, we are a long way from the finish line here – something Rubio acknowledged when he said that any proposal agreed here would have to be handed over to the Russians.
At that point, negotiations to stop the war would surely get tougher.
President Putin has shown little or no inclination to stop the conflict thus far.
This, then, is the most important reason the Ukrainians seem determined to keep the Americans on side.
European leaders have presented a counter proposal to the widely criticised US-Russian peace plan, with suggestions including a cap on Ukraine’s peacetime army and readmitting Moscow into the G8.
This will only take place if the plan is agreed to by the US, Russia and Ukraine, and the G7 signs off on the move. Russia was expelled after annexing Crimea in 2014.
The counter proposal also includes US guarantees to Ukraine that mirror NATO’s Article 5 – the idea that “an armed attack against one NATO member shall be considered an attack against them all”.
The initial peace plan was worked up by the White House and Kremlin without Ukraine’s involvement, and it acquiesces to many of Russia’s previous demands.
It covers a range of issues – from territorial concessions to reconstruction programmes, the future Ukrainian relationship with NATO and the EU, and educational reforms in both Ukraine and Russia.
US and Ukrainian officials are set to meet again today to continue work on the proposal.
It has also been reported that President Zelenskyy could travel to the US as early as this week to discuss the most sensitive aspects of the plan with President Trump.
Questions are being raised about the Russia-Ukraine peace plan, after US politicians suggested the proposal’s 28 points did not originate from Donald Trump’s administration but were put forward by Moscow.
Senators, critical of the US president’s approach to Ukraine, said they spoke with the US secretary of state Marco Rubio, who told them the plan is a “wish list” from the Russians and not a proposal offering Washington’s positions.
The US state department has called that account “blatantly false”, with Mr Rubio saying that the senators were mistaken and that Washington was responsible for the proposals.
The 28-point plan has surprised many for being so favourable to Moscow.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:30
How Ukraine peace plan came about
Republican senator Mike Rounds is among those who have claimed the plan was not drafted by Washington.
“This administration was not responsible for this release in its current form,” he said at a security conference in Canada. “They want to utilise it as a starting point.”
Mr Rounds added: “It looked more like it was written in Russian to begin with.”
Independent senator Angus King said Mr Rubio told them the plan “was not the administration’s plan” but a “essentially the wish list of the Russians”.
The senators said they spoke to Mr Rubio after he contacted them while on his way to Geneva for talks on the plan.
According to the Reuters news agency, some US officials also said the plan contains material that the US secretary of state has previously rejected and neither he, nor anyone in the state department, was aware of the plan before it was announced.
These latest claims have added to growing confusion over who was involved in drawing up the 28 points.
European leader asks: ‘Who authored the plan?’
Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk has raised concerns about its origins. On Sunday, he wrote on X: “It would be good to know for sure who is the author of the plan and where was it created.”
In a post on X, Mr Rubio insisted that “the peace proposal was authored by the US… but it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine”.
A former adviser to Vladimir Putin had denied that Russia was behind the peace plan. Sergei Markov told Sky News “it is American” and the points were a “very good basis for diplomatic negotiation”.
Mr Markov insisted there were “some positive moods in Russia about it” but also accused Europe and Ukraine of wanting to continue the war, despite Russia unilaterally launching and pursuing a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:12
Former Putin advisor challenged over 28-point peace plan
American special envoy Steve Witkoff and Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner met Kirill Dmitriev in Miami at the end of October to work on the proposals, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.
Mr Dmitriev, who is a close ally of the Russian president, was blacklisted by the US government in 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Image: Kirill Dmitriev and special envoy Steve Witkoff in St Petersburg in April 2025. Pic: Kremlin Pool Photo/AP
Trump rows back on demands
The US president initially demanded that Ukraine accept the peace plan by Thursday. But he has since rowed back from that position, instead saying the proposal was not his final offer.
The plan currently on the table calls for major concessions by Kyiv, including ceding territory to Russia, pledging not to join NATO and abandoning certain weaponry.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has not rejected the proposals outright, but said he would not betray Ukraine’s interests. Meanwhile, Mr Putin has described the plan as the basis of a resolution to the conflict.
Separately, Senator Roger Wicker, the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has been equally dismissive of the proposals.
“This so-called ‘peace plan’ has real problems, and I am highly sceptical it will achieve peace,” he said.
Morgan Geyser, who stabbed a classmate to please the internet horror character Slender Man, has been detained after cutting off her monitoring bracelet and leaving a group home.