They should be called OpenAI with (not open) in small print.
I argue a lot over “open source” software with non-OSI license and sometimes worry if I’m too pedantic. But I think it’s important to use terms accurately and not to confuse reality more than it already is by calling stuff that’s not one thing by that thing’s name.
I wonder if google and openai truly started out with these ideals and were just corrupted and overpowered by standard organizational greed. Or it was always bullshit.
With Google Eric Schmidt explained how it came: quite often when they were breainstorming about product launches, and something looked like it can grow the company, but is immoral to do, some person interrupted: ,,that would be evil''.
As Eric was trying to organize the company, he just added ,,don't be evil'' to company values. Still, he kept it all the way. It's too bad that he was changed after 10 years.
So I don't know how to square it with this recent info, but I would say Eric's recent interview is a creative re-interpretation of the circumstances. As execs tend to do.