zlacker

>>modele+(OP)
There is a lot in here but turning a non-profit into a for-profit definitely should be challenged. Otherwise why wouldn't everyone start as a non-profit, develop your IP, and then switch to 'for-profit' mode once you got something that works? You don't pay income taxes and your investors get write offs.

>>silico+z11
The replies that say "well the profits go to the non-profit, all's good" miss the reality of these high profit nonprofits: the profits invariably end up in the pockets of management. Most of those are essentially scams, but it doesn't mean that OpenAI isn't just a more subtle scam.

The hype and the credulity of the general public play right into this scam. People will more or less believe anything Sam the Money Gushing Messiah says because the neat demos keep flowing. The question is what's we've lost in all this, which no-one really thinks about.

>>dkjaud+K51
The reality was that nobody could have predicted the A.I breakthroughs when OpenAI first got started. It was a moonshot. Thats why Musk gave $50m dollars without even asking for a seat at the board.

OpenAI had to start as a non profit because there was no clear path forward. It was research. Kind of like doing research with the goal of curing cancer.

The unexpected breakthroughs came a bit quicker than anticipated and everybody was seeing the dollar signs.

I believe OpenAIs intial intention at the beginning was benign. But they just couldn't let go of the dollars.