Sam Altman just hired a CEO of Applications to help him grow his AI empire
"I'll remain CEO of OpenAI, but in this new configuration I'll be able to increase my focus on research, compute, and safety," Altman wrote in an X post announcing Simo's hiring on Thursday morning.
Altman announced Simo's hiring in a message to employees earlier on Wednesday. OpenAI published Altman's message as a blog post on the same day.
"Applications brings together a group of existing business and operational teams responsible for how our research reaches and benefits the world, and Fidji is uniquely qualified to lead this group," Altman wrote in his message to employees.
Altman said in his message that Simo "has already contributed a great deal to our company" since joining OpenAI's board in March 2024. He added that Simo will start work at OpenAI later this year and "will transition from her role at Instacart over the next few months."
In her new role, Simo will report directly to Altman.
"Fidji is exceptional; we have worked together on OpenAI for the past year and I have observed her deep commitment to our mission," Altman wrote on X on Thursday.
"I cannot imagine a better new team member to help us scale the next 10x (or 100x, let's see)," Altman added.
When approached for comment, a spokesperson for OpenAI referred Business Insider to its blog post.
so excited that @fidjissimo is joining openai in a new role: ceo of applications, reporting to me.
i'll remain ceo of openai, but in this new configuration i'll be able to increase my focus on research, compute, and safety.
these are critical as we approach superintelligence.
— Sam Altman (@sama) May 8, 2025
Simo started her career at eBay before moving to Meta, where she oversaw Facebook's app and advertising products.
She joined Instacart as a board member in January 2021 and became its CEO in August 2021.
On Thursday, Simo wrote in an X post that she will continue to be Instacart's CEO for the next few months, and will still be the chair of its board after she joins OpenAI proper.
So excited to be joining @openai and contributing to its mission. Thank you @sama for the opportunity- it will be such a privilege to work with such a talented team on one of the most important and ambitious endeavors in history.
I'll remain CEO of @Instacart for the next few… https://t.co/hDV3QhQrxj
— Fidji Simo (@fidjissimo) May 8, 2025
"I'm so grateful to my Instacart team for the amazing ride we had together, and I look forward to supporting the next CEO during the transition," Simo added.
Simo did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
an hour ago
- Wall Street Journal
The Companies Betting They Can Profit From Google Search's Demise
A new crop of startups are betting on the rapid demise of traditional Google search. At least a dozen new companies are pouring millions of dollars into software meant to help brands prepare for a world in which customers no longer browse the web and instead rely on ChatGPT, Perplexity and other artificial-intelligence chatbots to do it for them.
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
AI stocks look 'eerily similar' to the dot-com craze, warns CIO overseeing $15 billion. Invest in this 'boring' corner of the market instead.
The intoxicating buzz around artificial intelligence stocks over the last few years looks concerningly like the dot-com bubble, top investor Richard Bernstein warns. The CIO at $15 billion Richard Bernstein Advisors wrote in a June 30 post that the AI trade is starting to look rich, and that it may be time for investors to turn their attention toward a more "boring" corner of the market: dividend stocks. "Investors seem universally focused on 'AI' which seems eerily similar to the '.com' stocks of the Technology Bubble and the 'tronics' craze of the 1960s. Meanwhile, we see lots of attractive, admittedly boring, dividend-paying themes," Bernstein wrote. Since ChatGPT hit the market in November 2022, the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 have risen 54% and 90%, respectively. Valuations, by some measures, have surged back toward record highs, rivaling levels seen during the dot-com bubble and the 1929 peak. While Bernstein said he's not calling a top, trades eventually go the other way, and the best time to invest in something is when it's out of favor — not when a major rally has already occurred. "At the beginning of a bull market when momentum and beta strategies are by definition most rewarded, investors' fears leads them to emphasize dividends and lower-beta equities," he wrote. "In later-cycle periods when dividends and lower beta become more attractive, investors' confidence leads them to risk-taking and momentum investing." "We clearly are not at the beginning of a bull market and, as we've previously written, the profits cycle is starting to decelerate," he added. That's why dividend stocks could be ripe for appreciation, Bernstein said. He especially likes utilities stocks, which are known for issuing dividends. Dividends are payments that a company sends out to shareholders on a regular basis (usually quarterly), and they can be used by investors as income or reinvested in the stock. If reinvested, your position in the stock can compound. When considering compounding returns, dividend stocks actually hold their own against high-flying tech stocks, Bernstein said. "One of the easiest methods for building wealth has historically been the power of compounding dividends. Compounding dividends is boring as all get out, but it's been highly successful through time." "In fact, compounding dividend income has been so successful, that the Dow Jones Utilities Index's returns have been roughly neck-and-neck with NASDAQ returns since NASDAQ's inception in 1971!" Investors can gain broad exposure to dividend stocks through funds like the SPDR S&P Dividend ETF (SDY), Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF (VIG), and more.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
I'm tired of how AI tools like ChatGPT let authors ruin literature
Where would the gratification be if this work could be done in one hour instead of 15? The process is important to me, even if I'm stuck at my desk for hours pulling my hair out over tiny details. When I open a book, I expect every word to be produced by a human. Why shouldn't I? Humans have written literary masterpieces without machines for hundreds of years. There is more than enough evidence to prove it is possible. However, the literary landscape has changed since then. Reading in genres like self-published romance and fantasy, often called romantasy, has enjoyed a recent surge in popularity, thanks to social media platforms like TikTok and its BookTok community. But with the rise of artificial intelligence and its abilities in writing, it seems some people are drawn to the quickest shortcut. As a hopeful novelist myself, I followed the story of two self-published authors of romantic fiction who were caught using AI in their novels. Readers didn't have to dig far to see the proof – it might as well have been broadcast in bright, bold letters. Lena McDonald Using AI in 'Darkhollow Academy' was a mistake Fans of the romantasy series "Darkhollow Academy: Year One" by Lena McDonald were excited for the second installment of the series, but a passage in Chapter 3 of "Darkhollow Academy: Year Two" gave them pause: "I've rewritten the passage to align more with J. Bree's style, which features more tension, gritty undertones, and raw emotional subtext beneath the supernatural elements." For anyone who has used generative AI tools like ChatGPT, there is no doubt this is an AI response to a prompt McDonald used to enhance her writing. What's worse is that she chose a specific, successful author to mimic. Bree is the international bestseller of paranormal romance series "The Bonds that Tie." If I were Bree, I would feel incredibly cheated knowing that other authors were using the work I spent countless hours on to refine their own writing. In an apology that is no longer visible on her Amazon author page, McDonald admits to using AI as an editing tool: "As a full-time teacher and mom, I simply can't afford a professional editor, and I turned to AI as a tool to help refine my writing. ... I'm taking this seriously and will be reviewing the book carefully, making corrections where needed, and being more transparent in the future about my process." Those who keep up with BookTok controversies will recognize this broad and nonspecific apology style. What does "making corrections" even mean? Getting rid of the AI involvement, or hiding the evidence of it better? The next author is K.C. Crowne, author of a mafia romance novel – a type of story in which the main character, most often a woman, is either a member of a mafia family or gets involved with a dark and mysterious mafia man who is, of course, alluringly dangerous. "Dark Obsession" also includes an AI response in the middle of a high-tension scene: "Certainly! Here's an enhanced version of your passage, making Elena more relatable and injecting additional humor while providing a brief, sexy description of Grigori. Changes are highlighted in bold for clarity." Due to overwhelming negative reviews, Crowne had no choice but to apologize in an email to Futurism, a technology-focused online publication. However, she follows the same style as McDonald, with an almost noncommittal tone: "I made an honest mistake. I accidentally uploaded the wrong draft file, which included an AI prompt. That error was entirely my responsibility, and that's why I made the tough decision to address it publicly." Readers were upset at the prompt in the novel, sure, but the bigger issue is that Crowne used AI in the first place. She takes accountability for the editing mistake, not the use of AI. I don't understand why we're not using humans for this work There is so much I could try to unpack about why some authors choose to use AI, but there is so much that I don't understand. In a survey recently conducted by the online industry publication BookBub, 45% of 1,200 surveyed authors are using AI in their process, at least for marketing and administrative tasks, but more than 25% said they do include AI in the writing process. Almost 70% of respondents said they are self-published. Jennifer Lewy, an author who proudly uses AI, participated in an interview in which she described how she used the technology to write. But I could solve each problem Lewy cited with something completely human. Need prompts for where the story could go next? There are hundreds of blogs out there created by humans who need engagement. Need to review a paragraph for clarity or intrigue? Ask your friends, they would be happy to help, and could offer intelligent insight. These methods encourage human connection and support for small creators, all without AI's devastating impact on the environment. Why are authors using AI? I believe authors are turning to AI because they don't want to think. Writing a novel takes a lot of tedious work, like researching logistics to make sure magical elements like the main character's powers hold up in an author's fantasy world, getting hung up on crafting the best plot twist and more challenges that add up to hundreds of hours of work. It seems that some writers don't like to spend hours creating the backdrop for a fantastical landscape they will only use in one scene. But where would the gratification be if this work could be done in one hour instead of 15? The process is important to me, even if I'm stuck at my desk for hours pulling my hair out over tiny details, like figuring out what kind of food my fantasy characters would eat. If I let AI do the work for me, I would lose the satisfaction of connecting all of the red string on the corkboard and seeing the pieces come together. I would lose the pride I have in my work, knowing that I had to have a robot mindlessly generate ideas instead of naming characters myself or playing with word choice or connecting with a friend and talking for hours. I would lose the part of writing that makes me a better writer. It seems impossible that authors using AI won't stagnate. Without those grueling hours of creative thinking, plots will turn toward clichés and become even more predictable, spelling a downturn in quality. I believe having artificial intelligence think for them means that these authors will stop growing and improving. These AI-generated and assisted stories will learn from each other, and cycle out the same narrative with different titles. It will get itself stuck in an endless loop of poor quality and low creativity until reading loses its popularity again. Will AI steal my book when I publish it? When I eventually publish a book, there is a high chance that some form of AI will steal it. This leaves me with two options: unwillingly become a part of a system that I despise, or never follow my longtime-publishing dreams. Ten-year-old me would be devastated if robots got the chance to be bestsellers before she did. This terrifies me. If soulless AI writing becomes the standard, there is no way that my work will ever stand a chance. As a reader, I crave unique magic and diverse characters. If AI sticks to the script of what's popular, both could disappear. Others may see AI as the future, a new tool to revolutionize the writing world. I see the space I've built out of the special books that have changed my life falling to pieces. Sophia Valchine is an intern for the Detroit Free Press, where this column originally appeared. Reach her at svalchine@
