A lady named Helen Toner used to be in charge of a group that helps watch over another group called OpenAI. OpenAI makes smart computer programs, and one of them is called ChatGPT, which can talk like a human. But Helen said that she and her friends in the watching group did not know when OpenAI made ChatGPT and they found out from the internet. She also said that another person named Sam Altman, who is the boss of OpenAI, did not tell them about some other things he was doing with money related to OpenAI. This made Helen and her friends feel sad and upset because they think it's important for people in charge to share information with others who are helping them. Read from source...

1. The headline is misleading and sensationalized, implying a scandalous situation where the board was purposely excluded from an important launch by Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI. However, the article does not provide any concrete evidence or quotes to support this claim, only allegations made by a former director, Helen Toner.
2. The article focuses too much on the drama and controversy surrounding Altman's actions, rather than providing objective information about ChatGPT and its implications for AI research and society. This creates a negative tone and bias in favor of criticizing OpenAI and Altman, without acknowledging their achievements or potential benefits.
3. The article uses vague terms like "things that Sam was telling us" and "participation in OpenAI's startup fund" without explaining what these actually mean or how they relate to the ChatGPT launch. This makes it hard for readers to understand the context and significance of the allegations, as well as the motives behind them.
4. The article relies heavily on secondary sources, such as Twitter, Benzinga Pro, TED podcast, etc., without verifying or cross-referencing their credibility or accuracy. This makes it seem like the author is trying to sensationalize the story and use other people's opinions rather than doing proper journalism.
5. The article ends abruptly with a promotional note for Benzinga Tech Trends newsletter, which seems irrelevant and disingenuous, as well as an attempt to monetize the traffic generated by the controversial headline.