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
This. Even when we ignore the whole ethical aspect of "AI for benefit of humanity" and all that philosophic stuff, there are very real legal reasons why OpenAI should never have been allowed to switch to for profit. They were only able to circumvent this with their new dual company structure, but this should still not be legal.

>>sigmoi+i31
The point of their charter is not to make money, it's to develop AI for the benefit of all, which I interpret to mean putting control and exploitation of AI in the hands of the public.

The reality: we don't even get public LLM models, let alone source code, while their coffers overfloweth.

Awesome for OpenAI and their employees! Every else goes without. Public benefit my arse.

>>dkjaud+i71
I've been really hung up on the irony of "Open" part of the OpenAI name. I figure "Open" must mean "open for business". What is open about OpenAI?

>>mrinte+4d1
They changed their minds and didn't change the name. That's all.

>>wmf+Jl1
If that's the case the name should come with an asterisk and footnote. Keeping "Open" in the name is not genuine. Its would be like a superhero group called themselves "Hero Squad" and decided being superheros is not profitable as villainy, but still calling themselves Hero Squad despite the obvious operational changes.