Thread regarding Verizon Communications Inc. layoffs

@ah It only took a minute to see that one CEO made a decision not to hit a huge IPO payday until after the product had all of its safeguards in place to prevent future shareholders and board members from watering down or easing off of the needed safeguards so they can get a quicker ROI.

The other CEO was given the choice to stop, assess, understand and implement a statigic plan to carefully fix all of the mistakes of the last few years so there would be the least amount of impact to the good people that help build his company before he became CEO and clearly identify the weak links that need to be removd. But he chose to ask the board, or rather, they chose him and preloaded him with the decision to get rid of everything that isn't nailed down and outsource as much as possible after huge LAYOFFS which degraded the quality of the product further but would get the board a higher stock price which translates to mo money in their pockets. Even though all signs point to that gain as being temporary, almost like a flash in the pan that will eventually go back into decline. But by then the board and shareholders will have pulled out when they feel the temporary peak has been reached. I only glanced at it so I may have missed something.

The rest looked like humour that aligns with most of the posts I have seen lately which appear to be variations of coping mechanisms used when living in a toxic environment where you never know if you will have a job from one Thursday to the next. And it's always telling to see responses from the corporate puppets clutching their pearls, tearing their clothes and putting on sackcloth as a show of their pain and grief at hearing negative news about their source of truth. If you love Verizon and think all of these decisions are great and fully approve, crack open a long neck and sit on your porch for a while. You don't need to be here. Coming here just shows you want to instigate. Between the news articles over the years to the posts here, it's pretty clear that the news and public records support the claims on this site more often than not. I feel for the so called "VTeamers".

I may be reading a different post than you but I don't see where "stop" using AI was mentioned. But slowing down? If you say not a single person in theses articles state that, you may want to refresh your browser and clear your cache.

"OpenAI's CEO told staff that the company is open to slowing down or pacing cutting-edge AI development to ensure safety."

https://www.reuters.com/business/altman-tells-staff-openai-is-open-slowing-ai-development-bloomberg-news-reports-2026-09-11/

"OpenAI officially delayed its initial public offering (IPO) beyond 2026 to ensure that shareholder financial incentives do not interfere with the implementation of AI safety protocols" That does mean make it safe now to keep shareholders from saying safety is not important, getting money fast is.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2026/09/12/openai-isnt-going-public-this-year-sam-altman-says/

I would have to check but I think the news cycle yesterday was full of articles about every real AI delevoper pleading for government oversight and regulation and move a little slower, who does that? And companies that disagree most likely asked for shareholder opinion first.

Unless I misunderstood the title of the post, "Two different CEOs, Two different philosophies", the point wasn't about AI. It was about two ceos with two philosophies.

I guess the op could have made it more clear that the philosophies pertained to shareholder and board influence over business decisions especially if the shareholders and board have no experience with the business product. But maybe he or she gave the reader too much credit.

Even though I fail to see how this post is relevant to a site pertaining to to layoffs I’d actually like to respond to a few things.

1. “ He basically said that he was going to put the quality and safety of his product before shareholder profit concerns.”
   BUT….he didn’t lol, Altman said absolutely nothing like that and anyone can easily look the interview for themselves.

2. I have absolutely no clue of the analogy you are trying to make. Dan is in charge of Verizon which is a company that uses AI, Sam runs an actual AI company.

3. Verizon uses Anthropic (Claude code) which is ran by Amodei, who is the person who led the AI slow down initiative to which both OpenAi’s Sam Altman & xAi’s Elon musk then backed the proposal.

4. There is not one single person in any of the articles stating to slow down or stop using AI, it’s about safety concerns about how advanced it’s becoming and how to safeguard it