Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 734 posts

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#391

Post by komali2 »

zeryx wrote: post #155
darth_avocado wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI’s only goal isn’t building AGI. It is to build it first and make money off it.

Is there even a point to money post AGI?

Yes, because the development of AGI doesn't automatically mean the end of capitalism. Feudalism, mercantilism, and the final form, capitalism, weren't overthrown by new technologies, and while AGI is certainly a very special new technology, so was the internet. It doesn't matter how special AGI is if it's controlled by one company under the mechanisms of a capitalist liberal democracy - it's not like the laws don't matter anymore, or the contracts, debts, allegiances.

What can AGI give us that would end scarcity, when our scarcity is artificial? New farming mechanisms that mean nobody go hungry? We already throw away most of our food. We don't lack food, our resource allocation mechanism (Capitalism) just requires some people to be hungry.

What about new medicines? Magic new pills that cure cancer - why would these be given away for free when they can be sold, instead?

Maybe AGI will recommend the perfect form of fair and equitable governance! Well, it almost certainly will be a recommendation that strips some power from people who don't want to give up any power at all, and it's not like they'll give it up without a fight. Not that they'll need to fight - billionaires exist today and have convinced people to fight for them, against people's own self interest, somehow (I still don't understand this).

So, I'll modify Mark Fisher's quote - it's easier to imagine the creation of AGI than it is to imagine the end of capitalism.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#392

Post by dkdbejwi383 »

_Algernon_ wrote: post #250
neilv wrote: post #29

Can someone make an honest argument for how OpenAI staff are missionaries, after the coup? I'd be very happy to be convinced that supporting the coup was the right move for true-believer missionaries. (Edit: It's an honest and obvious question, and I think that the joke responses risk burying or discouraging honest answers.)

Altman has to be the most transparently two-faced tech CEO there is. I don't understand why people still lap up his bullshit.

People buy into the BS and are terrified of missing out or being left behind.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#393

Post by latexr »

energy123 wrote: post #359
angst wrote: post #274

“I don’t think Sam is the guy who should have the finger on the button for AGI.” - Ilya Sutskever, Co-founder, co-lead of Superalignment Team , Departed early 2024 - May 15, 2025, The Atlantic Anyway, I concur it's a hard choice as one other comment mentions.

I want Sam to win more than I do Zuck, just based on the proven negativity generated by Meta. I don't want that individual or that company anywhere near additional capital, power, capability or influence.

The hypocrite who violates everyone else’s privacy to sell ads, or the scammer who collects eyeballs in exchange for cryptocurrency and whose “product” has been banned in multiple countries…

Yeah, there’s no good choice here. You should be rooting for neither. Best case scenario is they destroy each other with as little collateral damage as possible.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#394

Post by surfingdino »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #264
burroisolator wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI only got big, especially for coding, because they were able to train on a massive corpus of open source code. I don't think it is a coincidence.

Another funny possibly sad coincidence is that the licenses that made open source what it is will probably be absolutely useless going forward, because as recent precedent has shown, companies can train on what they have legally gained access to. On the other hand, AGPL continues to be the future of F/OSS.

And if they AI companies don't like the license, they will ignore it or pay to be given a waver. Long may they rot in hell for doing that.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#395

Post by Joel_Mckay »

Startups with unstable revenue models often don't stand a chance against FANG company budgets. Also, high-level talent is rarely fungible with standard institutional training programs, and have options that are more rewarding than a CEOs problems.

Unfortunately, productive research doesn't necessarily improve with increased cash-burn rates. As many international post docs simply refuse to travel into the US these days for "reasons". =3

"The CEO and the Three Envelopes" ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38725206 )

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#396

Post by latexr »

richardatlarge wrote: post #386
energy123 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want Sam to win more than I do Zuck, just based on the proven negativity generated by Meta. I don't want that individual or that company anywhere near additional capital, power, capability or influence.

Yes, I’ve never seen a more sociopathic company than Meta. They are so true to the cliched ethos of “you are the product.” Sickens me that society has facilitated the rise of such banality of evil

> Sickens me that society has facilitated the rise of such banality of evil

American society. Those are uniquely products of the US, exported everywhere, and rightfully starting to get push back. Unfortunately later than what it should’ve happened.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#398

Post by BoorishBears »

thih9 wrote: post #378

What I hear is: “The person that profits from employees who don’t prioritize money encourages employees to not prioritize money.” Unsurprising, unhelpful for anyone other than sama, unhealthy for many.

This concept is not at all tied to trying to depress salaries and goes back decades: https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/mercenaries-vs-m...

I don't imagine Sam Altman said this because he thinks it'll somehow save him money on salaries down the line.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#399

Post by pickledoyster »

bigyabai wrote: post #256
arresin wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not unreasonable given the mountain of evidence of their past behaviour to just assume they are always the “bad guy”.

I would normally agree, but we're instantially talking about the company that made Pytorch and played an instrumental role in proliferating usable offline LLMs. If you can make that algebra add up to "bad guy" then be my guest.

It seems like you're claiming that Pytorch + an open-weight LLM > everything on this wiki page, especially the anchored section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_content_management_co...

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#400

Post by stackbutterflow »

baq wrote: post #360
energy123 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want Sam to win more than I do Zuck, just based on the proven negativity generated by Meta. I don't want that individual or that company anywhere near additional capital, power, capability or influence.

Between the trio of Thiel, Zuck and sama I’d pick the fourth option - I don’t want to be on that train anymore

It became clear in 2024 and 2025 that they're all dangerous.

All these tech billionaires or pseudo billionaires are basically believing that an enlightened dictatorship is the best form of governance. And of course they ought to be the dictator or part of the board.

Post reply on HN