851–860 of 985 posts
>Some 738 out of its around 770 employees, about 95 percent of the company, are now listed on the letter released early this morning.
https://www.wired.com/story/95-percent-of-openai-employees-t...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Quite a few of those employees are also stockholders None of them are stockholders, because (except for the nonprofit, which can't have stockholders even as a corporation) none of the OpenAI entities are corporations. Some of them have profit-sharing interests and/or (maybe) memberships in the LLC or some similar in interest in the holding company above LLC; the LLC operating agreement (similar function to a corpor…
Hm, ok, I was under the distinct impression that some of the early employees of OpenAI were stock holders in the entity in the middle. I base that on the graph on this page: https://openai.com/our-structure Specifically this graph: https://images.openai.com/blob/f3e12a69-e4a7-4fe2-a4a5-c63b6... Now it may be that I got this completely wrong but it looks to me as though there is an ownership relationship (implying sto…
That's the entity I discuss in GP as “the holding company above the LLC”.
I'm reasonably certain it is OpenAI LP, a limited partnership (but it is odd that its the one organization not identified in the document—the name of the entity used by OpenAI to control it, and separate information about OpenAI LP being created and existing as part of the for-profit structure fairly strongly indicates that it is the holding company), so the relationship would either be some kind of contractual profit sharing or a limited partnership, not a stockholder relationship. But, again while the information about it is less publicized than the LLC, it seems improbable that they would structure the operating agreement of the LLC so that it may not be managed for profit, but not provide the same in the holding company that's only possible source of profit is the LLC underneath it.
Wired: 95 Percent of OpenAI Employees Threaten to Follow Sam Altman Out the Door >Some 738 out of its around 770 employees, about 95 percent of the company, are now listed on the letter released early this morning. https://www.wired.com/story/95-percent-of-openai-employees-t...
Expecting the headlines that tell us that 125% of OpenAI employees threaten to walk. Just quit already and go work for Microsoft.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or what, they will quit and give up all their equity in a company valued at 86bn dollars? Is Microsoft even on record as willing to poach the entire OpenAI team? Can they?! What is even happening.
They don't have that valuation now. Secondly, yes, MSFT is on record of this. Third, Benioff (Salesforce) has said he'll match any salary and to submit resumes directly to his ceo@salesforce.com email as well as other labs like Cohere trying to poach leading minds too.
As of 10am PT, 700 of 770 employees have signed the call for board resignation. [1] [1] https://twitter.com/joannejang/status/1726667504133808242
imagine being in the last round of interviews for joining OpenAI…
If anything has become clear after all this is that humanity is not ready for being the guardian of superintelligence. These are supposed to be the top masterminds behind one of the most influential technologies of our lifetime, and perhaps history, and yet they're all behaving like petty children, with egos and personal interests pulling in all directions, and everyone doing their best to secure their piece of the p…
I'm not sure how people reach this sentiment. Humans strike me as being awesome, especially compared to other species. I feel like there is a general sentiment that nature has it figured out and that humans are disrupting nature. But I haven't been convinced that is true. Nature seems to be one big gladiatorial ring where everything is in a death match. Nature finds equilibrium through death, often massive amounts of…
If it is a superintelligence then there's a chance for a hard AI takeoff and we don't have a day to notice and purge it. We have no idea if a hard or soft takeoff will occur.
As I posted elsewhere, I think this is a conflict between Dustin Moskovitz and Sam Altman. Ilya may have been brought into this without his knowledge (which might explain why he retracted his position). Dustin Moskovitz was an early employee at FB, and the founder of Asana. He also created (along with plenty of MSFT bigwigs) a non-profit called Open Philanthropy, which was a early proponent of a form of Effective Alt…
Dustin was an early investor in Alameda Research and was also one of the biggest donors to Mind the Gap -- Sam's mom's Super PAC. When SBF was about to go under Dustin was his first call to try to raise money (came out in the FTX trial).
As of 10am PT, 700 of 770 employees have signed the call for board resignation. [1] [1] https://twitter.com/joannejang/status/1726667504133808242
Given 90%, including leadership, seems a bad career move for remaining people not to sign, even if you agreed with the board's action.
Not everything has to be done poorly.
Fun times for Adams friend Emmet Shear when he wakes up the next morning. Almost all his employees have signed a letter that means his own sacking in the company he was appointed CEO less than 24 hours ago. I can't think of a precedent case in business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is unfortunate that some people hear AI safety and think about chatbots saying mean stuff, and others think about a future system performing the machine revolution against humanity.
Can it perform the machine revolution against humanity if it can't even say mean stuff?