zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. CrazyS+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-11-18 00:55:05
OpenAI exists both as a nonprofit and, for several years now, as a for-profit company [1] that has taken billions of dollars in investment. It needs to make billions of dollars to return to investors just as much as any other for-profit company does.

[1] https://openai.com/blog/openai-lp

replies(1): >>crop_r+K
2. crop_r+K[view] [source] 2023-11-18 00:59:38
>>CrazyS+(OP)
The non profit is the majority owner of the for profit, and there is no investor pressure here to make billions.
replies(1): >>j45+B9
◧◩
3. j45+B9[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-18 01:51:18
>>crop_r+K
Could that not change as the board changes?
replies(1): >>jprete+sd
◧◩◪
4. jprete+sd[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-18 02:17:48
>>j45+B9
I think the board is required to be a majority non-equity-holders precisely because an equity-holding board will not keep to their non-profit mission.
replies(1): >>j45+fK1
◧◩◪◨
5. j45+fK1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-18 14:32:01
>>jprete+sd
Since it's a private non-profit corp it might be whatever they want the rules to be.

Arms-length neutrality on a board in silicon valley might still work like the rest as other comments have stated. Maybe someone can shed some light on it

replies(1): >>jprete+wU1
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. jprete+wU1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-18 15:35:48
>>j45+fK1
I’m presuming it was put into place as part of creating the capped-for-profit entity, to make sure the for-profit couldn’t itself permanently misalign the non-profit’s board.
[go to top]