zlacker

[parent] [thread] 10 comments
1. nickle+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-11-17 21:31:34
Pure speculation and just trying to connect dots... I wonder if they realized they are losing a lot of money on ChatGPT Plus subscriptions. Sam tweeted about pausing sign-ups just a few days ago: https://twitter.com/sama/status/1724626002595471740

Lots more signups recently + OpenAI losing $X for each user = Accelerating losses the board wasn't aware of ?

replies(3): >>yokopr+e1 >>ketzo+G4 >>clippa+bC1
◧
2. yokopr+e1[view] [source] 2023-11-17 21:36:15
>>nickle+(OP)
Not something you would fire someone on the spot over. This firing is spooking investors and costing them (and partners like MSFT) money
replies(2): >>garden+A9 >>chipga+Xl
◧
3. ketzo+G4[view] [source] 2023-11-17 21:52:16
>>nickle+(OP)
No way OpenAI cares meaningfully about losses right now. They're literally the hottest company in tech, they can get stupendous amounts of capital on incredible terms, and the only thing they should care about is growth/getting more users/user feedback.
replies(1): >>nwiswe+V7
◧◩
4. nwiswe+V7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-17 22:11:22
>>ketzo+G4
> they can get stupendous amounts of capital on incredible terms,

This may be the problem: at some level OpenAI is still a non-profit, and the more capital they accept, the more they're obligated to produce profits for investors?

Perhaps Sam was gleefully burning cash with the intention of forcing the Board to approve additional funding rounds that they had explicitly forbidden, and when they discovered that this was going on they were apoplectic?

replies(2): >>nvm0n2+AB1 >>swagmo+0K2
◧◩
5. garden+A9[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-17 22:21:09
>>yokopr+e1
The board seems so small and unqualified to be overseeing OpenAI and this technology..
replies(1): >>galley+rd
◧◩◪
6. galley+rd[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-17 22:37:44
>>garden+A9
In their defense OpenAI ballooned in just a few years.
replies(1): >>lobste+aE5
◧◩
7. chipga+Xl[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-17 23:18:55
>>yokopr+e1
They didn't "fire him on the spot". They did a review that it sounds like was going on before today
◧◩◪
8. nvm0n2+AB1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-18 08:16:41
>>nwiswe+V7
This sounds plausible. The timing seems sudden and there was chatter in the last few days about OpenAI needing to raise more money.
◧
9. clippa+bC1[view] [source] 2023-11-18 08:22:53
>>nickle+(OP)
I had an email from openai last night saying I now have to credit up front for api usage, rather than paying at the end of the month. Thought it was a bit odd for user paying like $3 a month for embeddings. Then looked at the news.

I think they have cash issues. Can’t get more uses due to lack of gpu, and current users are costing too much.

◧◩◪
10. swagmo+0K2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-18 16:26:59
>>nwiswe+V7
This seems like the most likely path to me. I think Sam was getting them on the hook for a LOT of shit they didn't want to be on the hook for
◧◩◪◨
11. lobste+aE5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-19 13:20:22
>>galley+rd
Indefensible. They could’ve voted to add more board members.
[go to top]