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

Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and others to join Microsoft

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and others to join Microsoft

#871

Post by svnt »

hef19898 wrote: post #177
tsunamifury wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He doesn’t have to write down the investment that came in the form of azure credits. He just doesn’t have to deliver. The core thing he is 100% focused on is not having a massive stock drop Monday morning. That’s it that’s his reason to exist all weekend long. After that. He has time to figure it out.

Don't forget, MS has a board as well. One Satya reports to the same way Sam reported to the OpanAI one. Potantially loosong 10 billion is nothing the board will just shrug off.

You seem to have missed the entire point of the comment you’re replying to.

The money was promised in tranches, and probably much of it in the form of spare Azure capacity. Microsoft did not hand OpenAI a $10B check.

Satya gives away something he had excess of, and gets 75% of the profits that result from its use, and half of the resulting company. Gives him an excuse to hoard Nvidia GPUs.

If it goes to the moon he’s way up. If it dies he’s down only a fraction of the $10B. If it meanders along his costs are somewhat offset, and presumably he can exit at some point.

Re: Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and others to join Microsoft

#872

Post by mrangle »

9dev wrote: post #288

I don’t quite buy your Cyberpunk utopia where the Megacorp finally rids us of those pesky ethics qualms (or ”shackles“, as you phrased it.) Microsoft can now proceed without the guidance of a council that actually has humanities interests in mind, not only those of Microsoft shareholders. I don’t know whether all that caution will turn out to have been necessary, but I guess we’re just gleefully heading into whatever…

Who says that the OpenAi Board has humanity's interests in mind? Copy and reality are often different. It's more likely that said Board feels most of its pressure from the Press, which is for-profit and often has partisan agendas that are detached from humanity's interests. Whereas profit motive traditionally does pesky things like incentivizes company response to the market (humanity) and keeps them from doing braindead things like freeing up their talent to be scooped up by "megacorp" because either a. ego or b. pressure from outside forces with their own agendas.

Re: Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and others to join Microsoft

#874

Post by itg »

ctvo wrote: post #821

The only shocking thing about this whole episode was how many people in the media failed to understand just how much power this board had. They were, at no time, under any obligation to do anything except what they wanted and no one could force them otherwise. They held all the cards. The tech media instead ran with gossip supplied by VCs and printed that as news. They were all going to resign 8 hours after their dec…

If talent starts leaving OpenAI and join Sam at Microsoft, what does OpenAI have left? If investors decide not to give money to OpenAI because their leadership comes across as over their heads, how will they continue running?

That may have been the leverage Microsoft and other investors tried to use, but OpenAI leadership thinks won't happen. We'll see what unfolds.

Re: Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and others to join Microsoft

#878

Post by nytesky »

shubhamjain wrote: post #99

Have to give it to Satya. There's a thin possibility that Microsoft would have to write-off its whole $10B (or more?) investment in OpenAI, but that isn't Satya's focus. The focus is on what he can do next. Maybe, recruit the most formidable AI team in the world, removed from the shackles of an awkward non-profit owning a for-profit company? Give enough (cash) incentives and most of OpenAI employees would have no qua…

Really? These two did not do the technical work but hired, managed, and fund raised.

They won’t necessarily be able to attract similar technical talent because they no longer have the open non profit mission not the lottery ticket startup PPO shares.

Working on AI at Microsoft was always an option even before they were hired, not sure if they tip the scale?

Re: Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and others to join Microsoft

#879

Post by emehex »

bradley13 wrote: post #574

Sam Altman and Greg Brockman have very similar backgrounds. They are both highly intelligent, both dropped out of college and lack any advanced education. They are classic Silicon Valley entrepreneurs: well-networked, great at fund raising, maybe even good managers. Potential contribution to advanced AI research: zero. What, exactly, does Microsoft want to do with them? Best guess: Use their connections and reputatio…

This is such a weird take. Sam and Greg were at OpenAI for 8 years! Why is it assumed that their “potential contribution to advanced AI research” is contingent on their having spent (no/more/less) time at academic institutions decades ago?

Re: Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and others to join Microsoft

#880

Post by gwd »

sanderjd wrote: post #855
9dev wrote: post #288

I don’t quite buy your Cyberpunk utopia where the Megacorp finally rids us of those pesky ethics qualms (or ”shackles“, as you phrased it.) Microsoft can now proceed without the guidance of a council that actually has humanities interests in mind, not only those of Microsoft shareholders. I don’t know whether all that caution will turn out to have been necessary, but I guess we’re just gleefully heading into whatever…

These concerns are in the hands of voters and their representatives in governments now, and really, they always were. A single private organization was never going to be able to solve the coordination problem of balancing progress in a technology against its impact on society. Indeed, I think trying to do it that way increases the risk that the single private organization captures its regulators and ends up without e…

> These concerns are in the hands of voters and their representatives in governments now, and really, they always were. A single private organization was never going to be able to solve the coordination problem of balancing progress in a technology against its impact on society.

Um, have you heard of lead additives to gasoline? CFCs? Asbestos? Smoking? History is littered with complete failures of governments to appropriately regulate new technology in the face of an economic incentive to ignore or minimize "externalities" and long-term risk for short-term gain.

The idea of having a non-profit, with an explicit mandate to use to pursue the benefit of all mankind, be the first one to achieve the next levels of technology was at least worth a shot. OpenAI's existence doesn't stop other companies from pursuing technology, nor does it prevent governments doing coordination. But it at least gives a chance that a potentially dangerous technology will go in the right direction.

Post reply on HN