zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. pknerd+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-11-20 08:13:21
Weird. Why did not he start a new company?
replies(3): >>pearju+N3 >>ssnist+94 >>jazzyj+15
2. pearju+N3[view] [source] 2023-11-20 08:30:10
>>pknerd+(OP)
Because OpenAI has first mover advantage, an actual product, the household "ChatGPT" name and starting anything from 0 would mean you start with a 3-0 disadvantage. Even if you threw a few billion dollars at it and attracted all of the top minds for at least a year - probably longer - you will be seen as the "ChatGPT alternative". How long before you can capture the momentum they have now with OpenAI? It's also a legal minefield, even when the majority of employees of OpenAI migrate, there will be all kinds of no-competes and conflicts of interest.

Strategically, this is probably a better move. Microsoft doesn't see their investment implode and they probably have some sort of plan to inject or absorb Sam and/or Microsoft back into OpenAI to prevent this in the future. Perhaps replacing the board of directors to prevent further infighting.

replies(1): >>pknerd+36
3. ssnist+94[view] [source] 2023-11-20 08:31:36
>>pknerd+(OP)
Being able to raise money doesn't necessarily translate into success. Perhaps his new crew won't be able to replicate the secret sauce. Or Satya just gave terms favourable enough to convince him at least for now to avoid giving off the impression that Microsoft's investment in OpenAI is incinerated.
4. jazzyj+15[view] [source] 2023-11-20 08:35:08
>>pknerd+(OP)
What's the lead time on a gross of H100s these days?
◧◩
5. pknerd+36[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-20 08:39:43
>>pearju+N3
At the end of the day, it is MSFT that emerged as a winner.
replies(1): >>pearju+aa
◧◩◪
6. pearju+aa[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-20 08:58:42
>>pknerd+36
Yes, when this whole saga is over they will probably absorb the carcass.
[go to top]