zlacker

>>staran+(OP)
Disappointing outcome. The process has conclusively confirmed that OpenAI is in fact not open and that it is effectively controlled by Microsoft. Furthermore, the overwhelming groupthink shows there's clearly little critical thinking amongst OpenAI's employees either.

It might not seem like the case right now, but I think the real disruption is just about to begin. OpenAI does not have in its DNA to win, they're too short-sighted and reactive. Big techs will have incredible distribution power but a real disruptor must be brewing somewhere unnoticed, for now.

>>Satam+0a
> there's clearly little critical thinking amongst OpenAI's employees either.

That they reached a different conclusion than the outcome you wished for does not indicate a lack of critical thinking skills. They have a different set of information than you do, and reached a different conclusion.

>>polite+Yj
I'm sure most of them are extremely intelligent but the situation showed they are easily persuaded, even if principled. They will have to overcome many first-of-a-kind challenges on their quest to AGI but look at how quickly everyone got pulled into a feel-good kumbaya sing-along.

Think of that what you wish. To me, this does not project confidence in this being the new Bell Labs. I'm not even sure they have it in their DNA to innovate their products much beyond where they currently are.

>>Satam+yp
I think another factor is that they had very limited time. It was clear they needed to pick a side and build momentum quickly.

They couldn’t sit back and dwell on it for a few days because then the decision (i.e. the status quo) would have been made for them.

>>abm53+6q
Great point. Either way, when this all started it might have all been too late.

The board said "allowing the company to be destroyed would be consistent with the mission" - and they might have been right. What's now left is a money-hungry business with bad unit economics that's masquerading as a charity for the whole of humanity. A zombie.