zlacker

What matters is what investors think, and by majority they seem very unhappy with all of this.

Speaking for myself, if they had framed this as a difference in vision, I would be willing to listen. But instead they implied that he had committed some kind of categorical wrongdoing. After it became clear that wasn’t the case, it just made them look incompetent.

>>kmlevi+(OP)
There are no investors in the nonprofit that controls OpenAI, LLC.

>>dannyw+P2
Sure, but Microsoft can sever the relationship if they want to. Thrive can choose to revoke their tender offer, meaning employees won't get the money they were expecting. New firms can decline to ever invest in OpenAI ever again.

There's a lot more to this than who has explicit control.

>>dannyw+P2
Sure, but there's no research to be done without money for compute and salaries for researchers, which is the entire reason the for-profit company was spun out underneath the non-profit — they needed money. And who would give OpenAI money right now, given that the board ousted the popular CEO in a coup without consulting or even notifying investors?

>>gkober+q4
This is the ideal scenario in my view, the only thing better would be if it also included more interest rate hikes.

>>gkober+q4
And I'm sure Google would jump at the occasion to fund the nonprofit and keep MS out while they develop their own. The funding Goal for the openAI was just 1B. Small price to pay for Google to neuter one of it's competitors exclusive access to the GPT model.