zlacker

Yeah, I misspoke earlier. Although nobody has actual power on paper, public and investor pressure can be just as influential.

>>mirzap+(OP)
Could Microsoft not hire Sam (reporting directly to Satya) and those who departed and equip them with compute access and ancillary resources? It seems less of a lift than salvaging the OpenAI situation internally due to the emotions and politics involved, non competes not existing in California (broadly speaking), and the logistics of attempting to apply pressure to a 501c3 board with very little leverage. The value is in the team, many who are now free agents.

Parting ways with OpenAI might be the only option if the org remains firm on the direction it has chosen. Build internally to reach capability parity and then accelerate ahead of them while slowly rolling out of the agreement with OpenAI, reallocating those previously committed resources internally.

“Due to the actions of OpenAI’s board, Microsoft had no choice but defend its investment in this revolutionary technology.” The pr wire writes itself.

>>toomuc+p1
There's already a Microsoft Sam.

>>toomuc+p1
Even if they could, why would Sam accept it? The smartest move for Sam is to just start his own for-profit company, easily raise a fuckton of money, hire all the talents from OpenAI and carry on with whatever he was doing. I think this is OpenAI's loss more than anything else. Now if the reason is truly a push against Sam's for-profit direction, I wonder if OpenAI will back it up by releasing their models to the public again. That would be world-changing, specially if the successor to GPT-4 is already trained.

>>LightM+ce
It’s a fair point, and I suppose the question is the math around the equity potential of a new org built from scratch vs being issued a boatload of Microsoft equity, the future profit potential from that grant, while being able to walk right in to a fully operationalized env.

>>mirzap+(OP)
There aren’t investors. It’s a non profit.

Everyone seems to have lost their mind missing this point.

>>toomuc+p1
> The pr wire writes itself.

Technically speaking, only because PR has been replaced by ChatGPT :-)

>>LightM+ce
Sam and the board have realized the existing structure of OpenAI does not make them (Sam, board, investors) as wealthy as a for-profit structure would. This is the start of winding down OpenAI. I will not be surprised at all if Sam does what you have said and some members of the existing board invest.

>>toomuc+p1
> It seems less of a lift

I’ve seen this expression a lot recently and it baffles me.

The word you are looking for is “effort,” or if you prefer adjectives, maybe something like “difficult.”

>>angora+wu
This will blow your mind but English has endless dialects and minor variations. This is like complaining that someone calls soda pop or says y'all.

>>Kye+2y
Englisc must ðêos hwierfan

>>macint+KF
My very rough attempt at translation: "Yes, English must change"

Am I close?

>>Kye+2y
Spoken like a true language hypergrowth apologist.

>>Kye+2y
I’m aware, but this phrase seems to be more meaningless corporate-speak than regional dialect or variation. The only purpose of phrases like this is to make the speaker sound smart at the cost of obfuscating what they mean.

>>angora+jc1
How is it obfuscated? The meaning is perfectly clear in context. You're stretching too much for this lift.

>>angora+jc1
Obfuscating? What's the purpose of using this fancy word? Why not just say "make hard to understand?"

>>Kye+mO
I tried for “English must not change” but sadly I never bought that Anglo-Saxon dictionary I lusted after in my favorite used bookstore 30 years ago.

>>jimmyd+ug1
I’m not against using big words when they’re used according to their actual accepted meaning. But take my upvote regardless :)

>>Kye+Nf1
> You’re stretching too much for this lift

I read/hear sentences like this all day at work and I’ve taken to just interpreting them literally. So I’ll have you know I’m neither exercising nor on an elevator right now.

>>angora+wu
Idioms exist and probably always will. I personally think they add a pleasant amount of variety and depth to communication, and sometimes even add deep nuance/context (even if I don't like every set of jargon or slang).

Even your "looking for" is a metaphor since you technically can't "look" for words (except as a metaphor for literally reading in a dictionary?) but we all know exactly what you mean. Moreover, if we trimmed language down to a minimal set and always used extremely precise meaning that might be an even worse experience than the "corporate speak" you're frustrated by.

Maybe you can redirect your anger to the part of corporate speak that I personally find annoying which is not the phrases per se but the propensity for using lots of words to say very little and to avoid directly taking responsibility for things. Let's put a pin in that one for now though and get something on the calendar to hash that out so we can get on the same page and circle back when we have a better bird's eye view on the action items and the right person to be decider :)

On the other hand you could take up loglan/lojban and maybe end up happier? Especially if it resulted in fewer meetings and managers.

>>collin+6s2
yeah!

and also:

let's all jump on a call, set kras so we stay on the ball, up our team work to get that perk, get our messaging right, so the kpi chart goes up and to the right.

go team! play ball!

>>jimmyd+ug1
Obfuscating is an easy word to understand. Only 11 letters. You, sir, are phantasmagorical. (16)

>>voisin+Oi
> Technically speaking, only because PR has been replaced by ChatGPT :-)

It only appears like that because PR writing has become careful and systematic, which is the kind of writing ChatGPT does very well.