zlacker

>>zuhaye+(OP)
Based on what I've seen/heard, they seem to follow a similar comp philosophy to Netflix -- pay top of market to get the best people.

But it's also important to note that only $300K of that is in cash. The other $600K is in profit participation, which could take years (maybe even a decade!) to be realized. It could also be worth $6M a year when it's realized.

But ultimately it's an investment of your time. Or to think of it another way, you're getting paid $900K a year but you're also investing $600K a year in OpenAI, which may end up being an amazing return or nothing at all, just like any startup investment.

Although with Sam at the helm, my guess is it will probably be worth more than $600K a year.

>>jedber+l7
yeah, Netflix is almost all cash in comparison. No clue what kind of liquidity OpenAI provides to cash out. Since it's "profit based" it actually seems even riskier, Microsoft could prevent OpenAI from showing any profit if they really want to

and if the info about the actual architecture of GPT-4 is legit, OpenAI might not have as much of an edge on the competition as they'd like people to believe. So that equity might not be worth quite as much as they think and explains why they so cagey about it in their paper on it. And why Sam Altman is calling for restrictions on research to slow down competitors

https://twitter.com/soumithchintala/status/16712671501017210...