3 ms·
I buy the former, researchers might be happier knowing their work potentially benefits all of humanity, not just a bunch of investors. But wouldn’t it be more d
by b3kart 6y ago
I buy the former, researchers might be happier knowing their work potentially benefits all of humanity, not just a bunch of investors. But wouldn’t it be more difficult to get funding as a non-profit?
- littlestymaar 6y agoIt's just never going to be difficult to get funding when you have Elon Musk and Sam Altman as founders (and even more so when founders put one billion of their own money into it).
- b3kart 6y agoSure, but that's OpenAI's particular set of circumstances. Generally speaking I struggle to see investors preferring a nebulous non-profit over a for-profit with a clear path to market.
- littlestymaar 6y agoSure, but we're explicitly talking about OpenAI here.
- b3kart 6y agoOf course. It's just that the comment I've been responding to suggested OpenAI going the "open"/non-profit route was to 1) get top researchers and 2) get investment. I was arguing that this doesn't seem to (generally) be a good way to get investment, but I agree with you in that in their case investment just wasn't a consideration at all.