While 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.
Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
11–20 of 339 posts
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#12“Our plan is to transform our existing for-profit into a Delaware Public Benefit Corporation (PBC) with ordinary shares of stock…The non-profit’s significant interest in the existing for-profit would take the form of shares in the PBC at a fair valuation determined by independent financial advisors.”
The details here matter and is bs. What should take place is this, OpenAI creates a new for profit entity (PBC, or whatever structure). That company sets an auction for 5-10% of the shares. This yields the valuation. The new company acquires the old company with equity, using the last valuation. So say $30b is raised for 10%, means $300B.
So the $160B becomes like 53% and then 63% with the 10% offer. So the non-profit keeps 37% plus whatever it owns of the current for profit entity.
Auction means the price is fair and arms-length, not trust me bro advisors that rug pull valuations.
I believe on this path, Elon Musk has a strong claim to get a significant portion of the equity owned by the non-profit, given his sizable investment when a contemporaneous valuation of the company would have been small.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#13> A highly autonomous system that outperforms humans at most economically valuable work.
That is not the real definition of AGI. The real "definition" can mean anything at this point and in their leaked report from the Information [0] they have defined it as "returning $100 billion or so in profits"
In other words raise more money until they reach AGI. This non-profit conversion to for-profit is looking like a complete scam from the original mission [1] when they started out:
> Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact.
"AGI" at this point is a meaningless term abused to fleece investors to raise billions for the displacement of jobs either way which that will "benefit humanity" with no replacement or alternative for those lost jobs.
This is a total scam.
[0] https://www.theverge.com/2024/12/26/24329618/openai-microsof...
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#14Is everyone now believing that AGI is within reach? This scrambling to have a non profit based structure is odd to me. They clearly want to be a for profit company, is this the threat of Elon talking?
If AGI were in reach, why would something so human as money matter to these people? The choice to transition to a more pocket-lining structure is surely a vote of no-confidence in reaching AGI anytime soon.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#15> Investors want to back us but, at this scale of capital, need conventional equity and less structural bespokeness.
This seems exactly backwards. At this scale you can establish as much "bespokeness" as you want. The investors want in and will sign pretty much anything.
It reminds me of the old joke from Paul Getty:
If you owe the bank $100 that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#16[flagged]
can I have some?
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#17While 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.
> A non-profit structure seemed fitting, and we raised donations in various forms including cash ($137M, less than a third of which was from Elon)
Saying "less than" is peculiar phrasing for such a substantial amount, but maybe some people believe Elon initially funded about all of it
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#18Maybe 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…
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#19> A highly autonomous system that outperforms humans at most economically valuable work. That is not the real definition of AGI. The real "definition" can mean anything at this point and in their leaked report from the Information [0] they have defined it as "returning $100 billion or so in profits" In other words raise more money until they reach AGI. This non-profit conversion to for-profit is looking like a comple…
Yeah IMO they should be required to dissolve the company and re-form it as for-profit. And pay any back-taxes their non-profit status exempted them from in the meantime.
Re: Why OpenAI's Structure Must Evolve to Advance Our Mission
#20While 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.
> A non-profit structure seemed fitting, and we raised donations in various forms including cash ($137M, less than a third of which was from Elon) Saying "less than" is peculiar phrasing for such a substantial amount, but maybe some people believe Elon initially funded about all of it
It's plausible that, without Musk's less-than-a-third, nobody else would have put in any serious money.