zlacker

>>himara+(OP)
This is why, when you claim to be running a non-profit to "benefit humankind," you shouldn't put all your resources into a for-profit subsidiary. Eventually, the for-profit arm, and its investors, will find its nonprofit parent a hindrance, and an insular board of directors won't stand a chance against corporate titans.

>>jasonh+4t
Interestingly it was the other way around this time, at least to start...

>>dnissl+Ct
This was pretty clearly an attempt by the board to reassert control, which was slowly slipping away as the company became more enmeshed with Microsoft.

>>jasonh+fu
Does that mean that the move of the board was actually good for openness of AI ?

>>rvnx+Yv
The board were literally doing their job. Anyone claiming incompetence is just mistaken about the stated goal of openai: safe available agi for all.

Throw in a huge investment, a 90 billion dollar valuation and a rockstar ceo. It’s pretty clear the court of public opinion is wrong about this case.

>>aunty_+tx
>safe available agi for all.

And they can pick two. Gpus don't grow on trees so without billions in funding they can't provide it to everyone.

Available means that I should have access to the weights.

Safe means they want to control what people can use it for.

The board prioritised safe over everything else. I fundamentally disagree with that and welcome the counter coup.