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
If your beef with this structure is that executives get paid handsomely I have bad news about the entire category of nonprofits, regardless of whether they have for-profit arms or not.

>>emoden+P61
The Mozilla management seems to be disinterested in doing anything to improve Firefox market share (by for example doing what users want: customization), they waste money on various "investments" and half-bake projects that are used by developers to stat-pad their CVs - and at the end of the day, they are paid millions.

IMO you could cut the CEOs salary from 6 million to 300k and get a new CEO - and we probably wouldnt see any difference in Firefox results. Perhaps improvement even. Since the poorly paid CEO would try to demonstrate value - and this best is done by bringing back firefox market share.

>>rvba+Za1
>300k [...] poorly paid

The median annual wage in 2021 in the US was $45,760,

https://usafacts.org/data/topics/economy/jobs-and-income/job...

Just to put bit of perspective...

>>psycho+1f1
300 thousand is a "poor" pay for a CEO

Current CEO earns 20 times more -> 6 million per year