The Dangers of Unchecked Leadership in AI Could Shape a Risky Future

Discovering AI: Profession, Daily Life, and Parenting Edition By Amy D. Love

The rise of “Founder Mode” in Silicon Valley, as described by Paul Graham and referenced in Kim Scott’s (author of Radical Candor) recent New York Times article ‘Founder Mode’ Explains the Rise of Trump in Silicon Valley Oct. 11, 2024, has become a powerful and controversial approach to leadership. Founder Mode is characterized by an autocratic leadership style where decisions are made unilaterally by the founder, with little room for checks, balances, or dissenting voices. Scott asserts this mirrors the leadership style of Donald Trump, and from my experiences in Tech, I would add Trump's embracing of the “Fake It Until You Make It” mindset has not only shaped his political career but also deeply influenced his public persona over the decades.

While this leadership style may be lauded by some in the entrepreneurial world, its application in the realm of artificial intelligence (AI) raises critical ethical concerns and highlights potential dangers. Silicon Valley has long embraced the idea of moving fast and breaking things, an ethos that aligns with the fake it until you make it mentality, however, it can also crash and burn like it did for Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos, as covered in Bad Blood. In AI, where decisions about ethics, privacy, and the societal impact of technology are at the forefront, Founder Mode is particularly precarious.

The Rise of "Founder Mode"

Founder Mode emerged as a dominant leadership style in Silicon Valley, often seen as the hallmark of iconic entrepreneurs like Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Brian Chesky. Paul Graham, co-founder of Y Combinator, coined the term to describe a leadership approach that empowers founders to make decisions rapidly and independently, avoiding the bureaucratic inertia that can stifle innovation in larger, more traditional organizations. While this method can drive extraordinary growth and breakthroughs, it can also breed a culture that resists transparency, accountability, and collaboration.

This is where the comparison with Trump becomes relevant. Trump’s leadership, both in business and politics, has embodied many of these same principles. His career has been punctuated by decisions made without consulting advisors, going with his “gut,” and pushing a narrative of success even when the facts didn’t align. For example, his launch of Trump University in 2005 was built on grand promises of real estate wealth-building techniques that were never fully realized, culminating in lawsuits and financial settlements by 2016. Trump’s rhetorical style, especially in his political career, has revolved around crafting a narrative of winning, often at odds with reality, and doubling down on that message until it gains acceptance. This “fake it until people believe it” method is an eerily close parallel to Founder Mode’s risks.

Implications for AI Companies: Altman, OpenAI, and the Rest

AI companies like OpenAI (led by Sam Altman), Google, and Microsoft are at the cutting edge of technological development, holding immense influence over society’s future trajectory. Their technologies have the potential to reshape industries, governments, and even personal lives in profound ways. However, the concentration of decision-making power in the hands of a few founders, combined with the “fake it until you make it” mindset, creates a dangerous cocktail in an industry where transparency, accountability, and ethical considerations are paramount.

Take Sam Altman and OpenAI, for example. As OpenAI developed ChatGPT, it rapidly pushed the boundaries of conversational AI, making enormous strides in language models. Yet, some have raised concerns about how quickly these technologies are being deployed without fully understanding their long-term societal impacts. Altman’s leadership, while visionary, has occasionally sidestepped the hard conversations about bias, disinformation, and job displacement that AI could accelerate. In a world where founder-led companies like OpenAI have disproportionate influence, there is a risk that important ethical considerations get sidelined in favor of rapid growth and market dominance.

This is not to say that Altman or other AI leaders intentionally ignore ethical issues, but rather that Founder Mode, by design, creates a structure where decisions are made quickly, with minimal oversight or external challenge. In an AI-driven future, the stakes are simply too high for this kind of decision-making.

The Dangers of "Fake It Until You Make It" in AI

“Fake it until you make it” is a mantra in the tech industry, where iterative progress can eventually turn a scrappy startup into a multi-billion-dollar company. However, when applied to AI, this mentality becomes much more dangerous.

For one, AI systems like ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, Microsoft’s Copilot, or Amazon's Lex and Kendra are being released into the public domain while still evolving. While these tools can produce astonishingly human-like responses, they also make errors, perpetuate biases, and generate harmful or misleading information. The very idea of "faking it" until the technology matures risks placing AI in positions of power—automating decisions in healthcare, criminal justice, and education—before it is fully reliable.

AI founders may be tempted to push the limits of their technology and its promises, just as Trump pushed the boundaries of what was truthful in his campaigns and business ventures. But AI, unlike other tech sectors, can have far-reaching consequences that impact millions. Consider the challenge of AI-generated disinformation. With language models able to produce convincing but false narratives, there is a risk of undermining truth on an unprecedented scale. If AI founders continue to operate under the “move fast, break things” mentality, society may face irreversible consequences before the technology is ready to handle such responsibility.

The Dismissal of Truth Tellers in AI

One of the more troubling aspects of Founder Mode, as seen in both Trump’s rise and in Silicon Valley, is the dismissal of truth-tellers. Trump has consistently rejected advisors and experts who challenge his views, favoring loyalty over accuracy. Similarly, in Silicon Valley, whistleblowers and ethicists who raise concerns about AI safety and bias often find themselves on the outside looking in.

Google’s dismissal of AI ethicist Timnit Gebru in 2020 is a notable example. Gebru, a leading researcher on the ethical implications of AI, was let go after raising concerns about bias in AI models and calling for greater transparency in Google’s AI development process. Her departure signaled to many that tech giants were more interested in advancing their products than confronting uncomfortable truths about the limitations and risks of their technology.

The problem with rejecting truth-tellers, especially in the realm of AI, is that the consequences are amplified. AI systems are becoming embedded in the fabric of society, influencing everything from hiring decisions to judicial sentencing. If the leaders of these companies—operating in Founder Mode—ignore or dismiss those who question the ethical direction of their technology, the risks to society could be catastrophic.

The Challenge Ahead: Balancing Vision with Accountability

As AI continues to evolve, the leadership style that guides its development will become increasingly important. Founder Mode, while beneficial in the early stages of innovation, must evolve to include more robust checks and balances. The implications of AI are too profound to be left to the unilateral decisions of a few visionary founders. Companies like OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon need to foster a culture that welcomes dissent, embraces truth-tellers, and takes ethical concerns seriously.

In the age of AI, the “fake it until you make it” mindset is not only insufficient—it’s dangerous. Leaders in AI must recognize that their decisions have global implications, and with great power comes great responsibility. Founder Mode, as it currently exists, must evolve or risk leading us into an era where technology outpaces our ability to manage its consequences. We must ask ourselves: is this the kind of leadership we want guiding the future of AI?

I’d love to hear your thoughts—how do you see Founder Mode and Fake It Until You Make It impacting the development of AI, and what changes do you think are necessary to ensure ethical progress in this rapidly growing field?