> We view this mission as the most important challenge of our time. Who buys this stuff?
OpenAI employees with unvested/unsold PPUs.
Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
51–60 of 339 posts
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#52Our current structure does not allow the Board to directly consider the interests of those who would finance the mission and does not enable the non-profit to easily do more than control the for-profit. I kind of thought that was the point of the current structure.
They referring to the reconstructed board that solely exists to rubber stamp every Altman decision as officially great for humanity, so what do they care what the board's considerations are? They'll go along with literally anything.
Loyalty can go away.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#53I don't understand why they are spending so much time and effort trying to put a positive spin on this whole for-profit thing. No one is buying it. We all know what's going on. Just say "we want to make lots of money" and move on with your lives.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#54Maybe I’m missing it in this article or elsewhere on the website, but how exactly is OpenAI’s vision of making AGI going to “benefit humanity as as a whole”? I’m not asking to be snarky or imply any hidden meaning…I just don’t see how they plan on getting from A to B. From this recent press release the answer seems to be: make ChatGPT really good and offer it for free to people to use. Which is a reasonable answer, I…
Their charter defines AGI as "highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work", and their intent is to ""directly build safe and beneficial AGI" or "[aid] others to achieve this".
They don't address benefits beyond the wide-scale automation of economically-valuable work, and as those benefits require significant revisions to social structures it's probably appropriate that they keep their mouth shut on the subject.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#55the non-profit will hire a leadership team and staff to pursue charitable initiatives in sectors such as health care, education, and science
Whether this is good depends enormously on what these initiatives end up being.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#56I don't understand why they are spending so much time and effort trying to put a positive spin on this whole for-profit thing. No one is buying it. We all know what's going on. Just say "we want to make lots of money" and move on with your lives.
"We are turning our non profit into a for profit because we want to make money" isn't legal.
To make this transition in a way that maximizes how much money they can make while minimizing what they lose to lawsuits they need to explain what they're doing in a positive way.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#57Used car salesman promises to save humanity. What a bunch of pompous twits. In other news, one of OpenAI's top talents, and first author on the GPT-1 paper, Alec Radford, left a few days ago to pursue independent research. In additional other news, Microsoft and OpenAI have now reportedly agreed on a joint definition of relationship-ending AGI as "whatever makes $100B". Not kidding.
> In additional other news, Microsoft and OpenAI have now reportedly agreed on a joint definition of relationship-ending AGI as "whatever makes $100B". Not kidding.
OpenAI did that all by themselves before most people had heard of them. The 100x thing was 2019: https://openai.com/index/openai-lp/
Here's the broadly sarcastic reaction on this very site at the time of the announcement, I'm particularly noticing all the people who absolutely did not believe that the 100x cap on return on investments was a meaningful limit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19359928
As I understand it, Microsoft invested about a billion in 2019 and 13-14 billion more recently, so if the 100x applied to the first, the 100 billion limit would hit around now, while the latter would be a ~1.3 trillion USD cap assuming the rules hadn't been changed for the next round.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#58> “We once again need to raise more capital than we’d imagined. Investors want to back us but, at this scale of capital, need conventional equity and less structural bespokeness.”
Translation: They’re ditching the complex “capped-profit” approach so they can raise billions more and still talk about “benefiting humanity.” The nonprofit side remains as PR cover, but the real play is becoming a for-profit PBC that investors recognize. Essentially: “We started out philanthropic, but to fund monstrous GPU clusters and beat rivals, we need standard venture cash. Don’t worry, we’ll keep trumpeting our do-gooder angle so nobody panics about our profit motives.”
Literally a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Sam, you can’t serve two masters.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#59> the mission of ensuring artificial general intelligence (AGI)1 benefits all of humanity
Why should we trust openAI for this more than e.g. Google or FB
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#60While there are issues that Mr. Musk must address, I don’t think this is one of them. Demonizing someone who helped you is an awful thing to do. If he gave 1/3 of the initial funding, he helped a lot.
> If he gave 1/3 of the initial funding, he helped a lot
He didnt just want to help, he wanted to control the company by being the CEO.