zlacker

>>nickru+(OP)
This all seems so weird, and the list of Board members doesn't make this any easier to understand. Apart from the 3 insiders, there are 3 other board members. 2 of them seem complete no names and might not qualify for any important corporate board. In a for profit shareholders in theory control the board, in a non profit I am not even sure of who really has control over things.

>>crop_r+k2
What I find incredibly odd is the lack of a Microsoft board seat, considering their large ownership in OpenAI. Something does not add up.

>>synaes+U7
Microsoft has zero ownership of the entity the board controls (the OpenAI nonprofit), and a for-profit firm having seats on a nonprofit board especially if it was because they invested in a for-profit subsidiary of the nonprofit would raise serious issues of the “nonprofit” being run for purposes incompatible with its status.

>>dragon+ra
Sure; but its still weird that Microsoft agreed to the deal with the board in the state that it was; not just no board seat, but three absolute outsiders, two of them extremely unqualified. We may look back on their decision to buy 49% of OpenAI as a big misstep.

>>015a+gb
How much did they pay for that 49% stake?

>>philip+ec
Something like $10 billion.

>>speedy+Zd
Already a good investment then, even if this fundamentally changes how impactful OpenAI is going forward.