Can Sam Altman be trusted?

This is the question that The New Yorker asked in their latest investigative article (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/13/sam-altman-may-control-our-future-can-he-be-trusted)

Remember back to 2023, when he was fired, then rehired, and there was a big hoo-haa about ethics, hiding information and more. This article digs deeper into the hundreds of messages, calls, meetings of that time to identify patterns of behaviour.

Sam is characterised as an exceptional persuader, someone who can sound sincerely aligned with whoever is in the room. Each person will believe that he agrees with them. He uses his charisma to reduce friction. The smoother the story, the less we challenge it.

He is a people pleaser, who seeks approval, even if it means contradicting prior commitments later. He doesn't lie like a villain in a bond movie, he comes over as your favourite startup founder at drinks.

The 2023 board revolt is a fascinating example of a tribe under pressure. The tribe split into two and power flowed to whichever group could mobilise fast whilst seeking belonging in an existential crisis. Speed won, not governance.

Behind the good messages is a fear being mitigated. They are a reputational shield, used to position, when they are clearly aware and are profiting from the negative outcomes they are causing.

The investigation dug deep and found that there wasn't a smoking gun, instead it was the cumulation of inconsistencies (Signal Blindness) that got too much for some people, like boiling a frog. Which makes the return to the status quo more likely.

When it comes down to it, is it question of whether Sam is good, or bad, or can be trusted, or whether someone who has these traits should be at the centre of shaping the future for civilisation.

What do you think?