zlacker

> And you need to be in the game to have any influence over the eventual direction

Effective altruism, eh?

>>ethbr1+(OP)
No idea, don’t know what they stand for. This is logic. What do you do if you’re Sam Altman and ChatGPT has blown up like it has, and demands resources just to run the GPU’s. What is his next move? It’s not business as usual.

The risk is that he’s too confident and screws it up. Or continues on the growth path and becomes the person everyone seems to accuse him of being. But I think he’s not interested in petty shit, scratching around for a few bucks. Why, when you can (try) save the world.

>>richar+L9
Money for resources to run ChatGPT is the tail wagging the dog, though.

If you need money to run the publicly released thing you underpriced to seize market share...

... you could also just, not?

And stick to research and releasing results.

At what point does it stop being "necessary" for OpenAI to do bad things to stay competitive and start being about them just running the standard VC playbook underneath a non-profit umbrella?