This would be a disaster.
Elon Musk is continually pushing for singular control of everything (not least of which is the US federal government). It makes me immensely uncomfortable.
Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
81–90 of 1001 posts
Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#82Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to this analysis from a few months back: https://www.wheresyoured.at/oai-business/ OpenAI are kind of fundamentally unsustainable as a business.
Before I read this 32-minute long article, who is Edward Zitron and why should I care about his opinion or analysis?
Ed Zitron has written many newsletters chronicling the business economics of OpenAI/other AI companies and their incentives.
They're the most comprehensive writeups in that aspect, although not as technically-oriented as most content on HN.
Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#84With first mover advantage disappearing for OpenAI and very good alternatives appearing, one wonders how long they can sustain a multi billion dollar per year loss[0]. The launch of ChatGPT was earth shaking, but what have they done since that impacts or excites the average consumer? Does their revenue even come from the average consumer, or primarily from API users that will lift and shift to a viable competitor? I…
According to this analysis from a few months back: https://www.wheresyoured.at/oai-business/ OpenAI are kind of fundamentally unsustainable as a business.
My understanding is that they sold a large chunk of the business to Microsoft in exchange for nearly unlimited Azure credits
Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#85OpenAI is not worth more than 9.74 billion, considering their moat is steadily shrinking and their models aren't even open. Even if OpenAI produces their chips via TSMC, it means that at least AMD can do the same, if not anyone else with just 100 million to spend.
OpenAI is the 6th most popular website in the world and if someone's going to kill Google, it's them. If they IPO'd today, they'd easily be worth hundreds of billions if not more.
This. Most users don't care about what model has the best benchmarks on twitter.
Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> It's actually pretty cool to have everything concentrated, makes it solvable in a single shot. This kind of language has no place in civil society.
I don't mean literal shooting, obviously. How would you say it in a woke and politically correct way that wouldn't offend anybody? I couldn't find a better phrase, wasn't even a pun. Apologies.
Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#87OpenAI is not worth more than 9.74 billion, considering their moat is steadily shrinking and their models aren't even open. Even if OpenAI produces their chips via TSMC, it means that at least AMD can do the same, if not anyone else with just 100 million to spend.
OpenAI is the 6th most popular website in the world and if someone's going to kill Google, it's them. If they IPO'd today, they'd easily be worth hundreds of billions if not more.
This would have been true 2 years ago.
Now with DeepSeek-R1, any company can host very similar service, so the technological edge has been lost.
Google itself offers similar experience with Google Flash 2.0 Thinking.
We haven't seen revolution with o3 (most of us, programmers, here are still with claude-sonnet-3.5 than the supposedly groundbreaking gpt-o3).
Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#88It's a bit too late for that and it is not enough. The time for such a bid like this was when Sam was was ousted out of OpenAI and in complete state of chaos. Investors already put their money in at around $157B+ and are not willing to take a price cut down to less than $100BN. Unless that is the amount that Sam wants to walk away with, but its isn't even going to be no where near close to enough.
> Investors already put their money in at around $157B+ and are not willing to take a price cut down to less than $100BN. This is for a controlling stake, not outright ownership, isn't it?
Yes but why would investors on the board who own a piece of OpenAI at 157B be ok with a sale at a smaller valuation?
Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#89> Elon's offer to purchase the OpenAI nonprofit for $97.4billion isn't going to happen, but it may seriously complicate OpenAI's efforts to claim the nonprofit is fairly valued at $40billion. If you won't sell it for $97.4billion, that means you think it's worth more than that. https://x.com/KelseyTuoc/status/1889064215710941594
Didn't they already raise at a $157 billion valuation?
Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI
#90> Elon's offer to purchase the OpenAI nonprofit for $97.4billion isn't going to happen, but it may seriously complicate OpenAI's efforts to claim the nonprofit is fairly valued at $40billion. If you won't sell it for $97.4billion, that means you think it's worth more than that. https://x.com/KelseyTuoc/status/1889064215710941594
That's a bad analysis. There's clearly non-market forces at play for why Sam Altman doesn't want to give control to a group associated with Elon.
Kelsey Piper is a very serious tech journalist who has written extensively about the OpenAI for-profit transition and the corporate structures involved [1].
You can present an argument about why it's a "bad analysis" but your offhand "analysis" is not constructive or well-informed here.
[1] https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/380117/openai-microsoft-s...