zlacker

>>modele+(OP)
Similar to the firing-unfiring of Sam Altman, so much of this seems to be boil down to OpenAI's puzzle-box organizational structure.

It seems like the whole "capped for-profit within a non-profit" is not going to to work long term.

>>cljaco+Fn1
A non-profit with a for-profit subsidiary is actually pretty common and it is probably one of the more "normal" things OpenAI has done.

https://www.marcumllp.com/insights/creating-a-for-profit-sub...

My personal opinion is that not creating a for-profit wing would have made a even bigger mess.

(But then I also think this suit is very obviously without merit and the complaint is written in a way that it sounds like lawyers sucking up to Musk to take his money - but people seem to be taking it very seriously!)

>>Jamiso+wM1
I don't think the problem is with having a for-profit wing. The problem is that only the for-profit wing got to use the technology developed by the non-profit, when the non-profit was explicitly tasked with releasing the technology to the public, allowing competition.