zlacker

Would those talented engineers or scientists be content with significantly lower compensation and generally significantly less resources to work with. However good their intentions might this probably won't make them too attractive to future investors and antagonizing MS doesen't seem like a great idea.

OpenAI is far from being self-sustainable and without significant external investment they'll just probably be soon overtaken by someone else.

>>wwtrv+(OP)
I don't know; on a lot of those questions. I tend to think that there was more mission and ideology at OAI than at most companies; and that's a very powerful motivational force.

Here's something I feel higher confidence in, but still don't know: Its not obvious to me that OAI would be overtaken by someone else. There are two misconceptions that we need to leave on the roadside: (1) Technology always evolves forward, and (2) More money produces better products. Both of these ideas, at best, only indicate correlative relationships, and at worst are just wrong. No one has overtaken GPT-4 yet. Money is a necessary input to some of these problems, but you can't just throw money at it and get better results.

And here's something I have even higher confidence in: "Being overtaken by someone else" is a sin worthy of the death penalty in the Valley VC Culture; but their's is not the only culture.

>>015a+ru
Citation needed on the ideology being a powerful motivational force in this context. People who think they're doing groundbreaking work that'll impact the future of humanity are going to be pretty motivated ideologically either way regardless of if they're also drinking the extra flavor from the mission statement's Kool-Aid.