121–130 of 359 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Can someone explain to me why California would believe Sam Altman plans to stay in California? The simple answer is unless developing LLMs becomes commoditised, the best place in the world to do it is in San Francisco. You don't take your manufacturing business out of Shenzhen without very good reason.
That still doesn't explain the value of Sam Altman's pinky promise.
Prediction for the future: OpenAI IPO's lots of money changes hands, it chugs along for a while, hits a hard spot and then is taken private for pennies on the dollar by Microsoft.
But I think you're totally incorrect on this; oAI is going to be one of the enduring tech consumer brands built in this half of the 21st century.
Prediction for the future: OpenAI IPO's lots of money changes hands, it chugs along for a while, hits a hard spot and then is taken private for pennies on the dollar by Microsoft.
Could you elaborate? Not looking for a proof, just want to understand your train of thought. Always liked your commentary. Thanks!
There is no clear path to the trillion dollars today. By IPOing, the owners (who have a good idea of where it's going) can exchange their ticket to the trillion for cash today.
Seems like a bad deal unless you know the ticket won't get called. Then you've just made bank.
And you might have noticed some form of hype around AI these last few years - arguably this could be to make the trillion dollar seem more realistic and therefore making the owners more money when selling their ticket to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entity in question operates in california and is thus subject to california law. California has laws around charitable entities. One might reasonably claim it's overreach, but in response OpenAI could just leave the state. Which is what they threatened.
Not when the AG sues the board and Sam for all the violations that happened around his ouster. The board isn't independent.
Board independence is largely a silly idea, people aren't even on the same page as to what the board is supposed to be independent of, and in this case it's not even clear which board you mean - the current one? The previous one? In what way are they less independent than any other board?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is being restructured to no longer be a nonprofit, but a for-benefit corporation instead. That is why California's approval was required (and IMO is just as corrupt as it sounds).
But aren't non profits a federal thing with rules dictated by the IRS? Why is California involved?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Can someone explain to me why California would believe Sam Altman plans to stay in California? The simple answer is unless developing LLMs becomes commoditised, the best place in the world to do it is in San Francisco. You don't take your manufacturing business out of Shenzhen without very good reason.
The Texas Stock Exchange launches next year and I predict we will see a lot of tech try to move to launch there given txse claim to have lower compliance and less esg needs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but most of the country’s AI talent is concentrated there. Not to mention venture capital. What’s the advantage of moving? Maybe lower taxes and a cheaper rent. That seems like a small price to pay compared to the hundreds of billions they’re putting into data centers.
They're concentrated there because they've been asked to concentrate there. That can change on a dime. It's not like data centers are mainly in SF.
People tried very hard to change it between 2020-2023 and utterly failed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I would think that sort of framing implies that the government gives them permission to exist. > Rather than, the natural state is that they exist unless they do something bad enough to be shut down. JFC, come on. Corporations are legal entities and have no existence separate from the law. If they even have a natural state, that natural state is non-existence.
> If they even have a natural state, that natural state is non-existence A corporation is a legal fiction that describes an association of people. The association is real and has a natural state. The corporate existence does not. (Analogous: a house is real. Land is real. Property is a social construct.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Texas Stock Exchange launches next year and I predict we will see a lot of tech try to move to launch there given txse claim to have lower compliance and less esg needs.
I learned recently that Nasdaq imposes DEI on companies as a requirement of listing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Texas Stock Exchange launches next year and I predict we will see a lot of tech try to move to launch there given txse claim to have lower compliance and less esg needs.
I doubt it. The state where a company is incorporated or has its headquarters located doesn't impact where it can list shares. There are several foreign companies with no significant US operations which are listed on US stock markets just to gain access to capital.