Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

wsj.com

51–60 of 359 posts

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#51
post #24

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. Unless you mean, they need the government's "permission" to even file to become a corporation... But even in that case, you aren't asking for permission, you're doing the old school equivalent of signing up for a domain, y…

> 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.

> All corporations are devoid of inherent nature.

> There is no inherent nature whatsoever.

> What is inherently existing is empty.

> What is empty is inherently existing.

Nāgārjuna vs Delaware

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#52

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?

> aren't non profits a federal thing with rules dictated by the IRS? Why is California involved?

Most states incorporate federal rules for their own exemptions for charities and non-profits. California treating OpenAI to date as a non-profit has revenue implications for Sacramento.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#53

This is kind of a wild story. Sam Altman is openly flexing that he was able to skirt the rules and regulations by threatening economic damage to California. It's not even subtle anymore. This reminds me of when the former CEO of Hyundai, Chung Mong-koo, went to prison for embezzlement. In just 3 years he was pardoned because the President of South Korea basically said, "we need you for the economy." We're not even pr…

didn't Sam does this before with another company? he was able to restructure it and come out on top... searching for article... was it Helion? now that i think harder, didnt he comment about it on HN??

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations are applications of government power and have no natural rights, their legal rights are at best proxies for the rights of natural persons with some interest in them, and at worst a fiction which serves to limit the rights of natural persons. Also, having a right to do something does not contradict a description of you leveraging power by using a threat of doing it, in the first place.

> Corporations are applications of government power and have no natural rights Sure. Whatever. The people who own and work at OpenAI have no obligation to remain in California. (I’d also argue that global norms are currently walking back from the notion of natural rights pretty much everywhere except for in some parts of Europe. The concept doesn’t work without an appeal to divinity.)

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#56
post #11

TFA: > OpenAI had spent months making the case that it was the economic heart of the California economy—and would be willing to leave if Bonta blocked its plan to convert to a simpler corporate structure. https://x.com/sama/status/1983223056668746218 : > California is my home, and I love it here, and when I talked to Attorney General Bonta two weeks ago I made clear that we were not going to do what those other compa…

This feels like a narrative being pushed. Tech oligarchs these days are flexing by showing off how much they are able to bully government, and Altman wants to get in on the game by spinning things this way. I’m not convinced they really bent the rules for OpenAI any more than usual given they only employ a few hundred people.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#57

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.

Open AI will probably have the highest market cap of any company in the world on the opening day of trading.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations exist at the pleasure of government do they not? They are not some naturally-existing thing.

> Corporations exist at the pleasure of government do they not? No. “At the pleasure of” means total discretion. The government can’t just stop letting businesses incorporate because it doesn’t like how a county voted.

Why can't the government do that? Is it because the government created laws that limited its total discretion? That is besides my point. The people allow for corporations to exist is what I was getting at, and in the US businesses incorporate at the state level. So asking why California has a say in the structure of a company incorporated in it seemed odd to me on its face.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#60
post #11

TFA: > OpenAI had spent months making the case that it was the economic heart of the California economy—and would be willing to leave if Bonta blocked its plan to convert to a simpler corporate structure. https://x.com/sama/status/1983223056668746218 : > California is my home, and I love it here, and when I talked to Attorney General Bonta two weeks ago I made clear that we were not going to do what those other compa…

This feels like a narrative being pushed. Tech oligarchs these days are flexing by showing off how much they are able to bully government, and Altman wants to get in on the game by spinning things this way. I’m not convinced they really bent the rules for OpenAI any more than usual given they only employ a few hundred people.

OpenAI has over 5,000 employees. In addition to their headcount, they are now the highest valued private company in the world.

They're going to have some leverage.

Post reply on HN