zlacker

Agreed the article is more about probing the board’s weakness.

But the board seems to have a weak hand. It can decide to disappoint the for profit investors. But it doesn’t own Sam, or the vast majority of the workers, and maybe not much of the know how. And they can walk if the board disappoints them.

The board’s altruism might be great, but it lacks the legal tools to do what it wants, against organized labor backed by unlimited capital.

>>Digory+(OP)
The board do own Chat-GPT though

>>Digory+(OP)
I'd like to hear more about the board's argument before deciding that this was "virtuous board vs greedy capitalist". The motivations for both sides is still unclear.

>>Trombo+t
That’s not only trivial to replace with enough funding for training, but ChatGPT is barely a 0.1 release. Everything after is where the big money is.

>>joshsp+Z2
It's not trivial given current supply bottlenecks, not to mention research expertise.

>>joshsp+Z2
First mover advantage and Microsoft integration is nothing to sneeze at.

>>joshsp+Z2
trivial to replace

And yet no one has been able to do that since gpt4 was released.

>>psbp+92
Seems unusual for a nonprofit not to have a written investigative report or performance review conducted by a law firm or auditor. Similar to what happened with Stanford's ousted president but more expedited if matters are more pressing.

>>p1esk+j4
That's only because the key players have no reason to compete.

They don't want to run a developer/enterprise ChatGPT platform.

Google cares about Search, Apple about Siri, Meta about VR/Ads. But those three are interesting heavily in their own LLMs which at some point may better OpenAI.

>>himara+14
I don't feel like compute for pretraining the model was a huge constraint?

The supply bottlenecks have been around commercializing the ChatGPT product at scale.

But pretraining the underlying model I don't think was on the same order of magnitude, right?

>>himara+14
The control of the supply si with Microsoft, who are likely falling on Sam’s side here.

>>erosen+84
For sure.

But if Altman has a new venture that takes first mover advantage on a whole different playing field MS could easily get left in the dust.