Greg Brockman interview [video]

Post by senordevnyc » Mon, May 25, 2026, 4:18 PM UTC

az226 wrote: post #231

dooglius wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The objectional part would be: - in 2019, OpenAI created a capped-profit subsidiary in order to attract funding from commercial entities Particularly if it creates a conflict of interest for anyone making decisions on behalf of the nonprofit

100% disagree. - in 2025, OpenAI’s for-profit entity recapitalized from a capped-profit entity with residuals flowing to the nonprofit to a traditional public benefit corporation with traditional equity This is the egregious part. Before full for profit conversion it was worth $300B. Then after $850B. A true fiduciary would set an auction and that would set the price for for profit valuation. And then all existing in…

Post by senordevnyc » Mon, May 25, 2026, 4:21 PM UTC

achierius wrote: post #183

tyre wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, no, not at all. A non-profit shouldn’t have to take the highest bidder regardless. The whole _point_ of a non-profit is to act beyond purely short-term financial gains. “Elon buying this doesn’t align with the mission” is a completely normal, reasonable, and healthy response for most non-profits. What’s great is that we don’t need to speculate about a counter factual. He did end up building a chatbot! Whose def…

But the decision is still subject to heavy scrutiny; in fact, more than with normal for profit corporations. It does not seem like the board acted in the best interests of the nonprofit here, they acted in their own.

Post by root-parent » Mon, May 25, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

_zoltan_ wrote: post #33

nba456_ wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If his entire personal diary got exposed and that's the worst that's in it, good for him.

Worse? There is nothing wrong with wanting 1B. Anybody who said they wouldn't want it is lying.

Post by wdr1 » Mon, May 25, 2026, 7:37 PM UTC

krackers wrote: post #187

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #21

Why can't someone ask what happened in Ilya's mind. Firing Sam and then signing the solidarity letter of Sam to leave OpenAI if was fired. Other than that, all other information seems kind of just going over the surface.

>what happened in Ilya's mind I thought Ronan Farrow's investigate essay answered that pretty satisfactorily? https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/13/sam-altman-may...

Post by paulddraper » Mon, May 25, 2026, 8:42 PM UTC

tyre wrote: post #145

tasuki wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that, please! I also never understood why the board resigned after ousting Sam...

Because they lost and crumbled. They were unbelievably outmatched by Sam (a world-class manipulator) and Satya (the money behind OpenAI and himself a political genius.) They were outmaneuvered, panicked, and folded. Did they have to? No. But in the moment they thought they were on the precipice of nuking a deca-billion dollar company, their life’s greatest work, and a generational company. It’s hard to stand against…