5 ms·

So he was looking to build his own AI chips with a company he owned and supply them to OpenAI? And enlist SoftBank for funding? Isn’t this very similar to Ada

So he was looking to build his own AI chips with a company he owned and supply them to OpenAI? And enlist SoftBank for funding? Isn’t this very similar to Adam Neumans tactics?

Zetobal 3y ago
Other peoples Ideas and other peoples money, pretty on topic.
- gumballindie 3y ago
  Isnt that how most ai is built anyway? Taking what’s not theirs and selling it for profit?
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago
    Something something greater good
  - mopenstein 3y ago
    Isn't that exactly how humans have been able to progress so far? By standing on the shoulders of others to reach higher and higher lofts? If you don't want your knowledge to be used by machines or man, then you should bottle them up and hide them from both.
    - r3d0c 3y ago
      [flagged]
    - lewhoo 3y ago
      With an important distinction. No previous generation (obviously) tried to decide that we're done and it's the apes' turn now. I don't know if AGI is a near possibility or not, but if it is then it won't be our children who stand on the shoulders of giants anymore, will it ?
    - gumballindie 3y ago
      Not really, no. Humans progressed by building societies and rules. No society built on theft ever thrived.
- andy99 3y ago
  Ideas and money are cheap and plentiful. Execution is everything and from what little I know about Altman that seems to be his strength.
  - CPLX 3y ago
    What ventures has he executed successfully?
    - threeseed 3y ago
      OpenAI obviously. You can't argue that the company has not been impressively run and not just because of the quality of the models.
      - CPLX 3y ago
        As far as I can tell his tenure was marked by interpersonal conflict with most of the key players, after which he was suddenly fired amid allegations he was using his role as head of a non profit to advance his own personal interests.
        threeseed 3y ago
        This is inside baseball. Nobody other than us care about the inner workings. At the end of the day he is responsible for building a $100b business, with a product users love, that has attracted developers in droves and built a highly successful partnership with Microsoft. And pretty sure the direction of the company is what the issue was. Not any side projects.
        CPLX 3y ago
        It’s not a company it’s a non-profit organization with a defined mission. Pretty sure that’s the crux of the problem here. The sort of interesting part of all these comment threads is the unstated assumption that a very fast growing multi billion dollar for profit tech company is an unmitigated “good thing” and anyone getting in the way of that is wrong. Not everyone thinks that or has that as a goal.
ethanbond 3y ago
This seems way, way more reasonable than WeWork. Maybe if Altman bought every datacenter and then nudged OpenAI toward renting them out, or if Altman bought the "Open" trademark and licensed it to OpenAI for a million dollars or whatever.
- bmitc 3y ago
  > This seems way, way more reasonable than WeWork. Really? Altman advertised and marketed himself as someone with no vested financial interest in OpenAI, but then he's going around creating companies with foreign states and companies that will then sell to the non-profit he's CEO of?
  - satellite2 3y ago
    No one is saying that. If the chip making subsidiary was owned by OpenAI it could have very well allowed economies of scale and enable reducing dependency on Microsoft. Perfectly aligned with OpenAI goals.
    - freejazz 3y ago
      But it wouldn't be owned by OpenAI - that's the other poster's point. You're making it for them.
  - ethanbond 3y ago
    To be clear, I don’t think that would be totally above board; it wouldn't seem ethical to my moral compass at least. I just think it’s far short of the completely indefensible, totally unambiguous, and obviously fraudulent behavior of Neumann. There are gradations of conflict and malfeasance.
    - bmitc 3y ago
      That's a fair and good point.
medler 3y ago
I don’t think it’s fair to jump to that conclusion, since he apparently never raised the money, founded the company, or developed the chips. The worst we can say is that his attention was divided and his goals may not have been aligned with OpenAI’s. And of course, I say this assuming the anonymous source is correct, which may not be the case.
- Terretta 3y ago
  Attentions divided seems to be the thing these days. Have you really made it as a SV CEO if you're not at least a 3-ring Tres Commas Club member? Popular picks seem to be any 3 of ad scaffolds, money processing, rent/gig vigs, energy, digital ledgers, big statistics, profit|altruism mashups, and, of course, the final frontier.
ignoramous 3y ago
> Adam Neumans tactics? Neuman's still at it with Flow? In line with that, more impetus (not that he needs any) for Sam to go ahead and do it anyway.

So he was looking to build his own AI chips with a company he owned and supply them to OpenAI? And enlist SoftBank for funding? Isn’t this very similar to Adam Neumans tactics?

Zetobal 3y ago

Other peoples Ideas and other peoples money, pretty on topic.

gumballindie 3y ago
Isnt that how most ai is built anyway? Taking what’s not theirs and selling it for profit?
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago
  Something something greater good
- mopenstein 3y ago
  Isn't that exactly how humans have been able to progress so far? By standing on the shoulders of others to reach higher and higher lofts? If you don't want your knowledge to be used by machines or man, then you should bottle them up and hide them from both.
  - r3d0c 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - lewhoo 3y ago
    With an important distinction. No previous generation (obviously) tried to decide that we're done and it's the apes' turn now. I don't know if AGI is a near possibility or not, but if it is then it won't be our children who stand on the shoulders of giants anymore, will it ?
  - gumballindie 3y ago
    Not really, no. Humans progressed by building societies and rules. No society built on theft ever thrived.
andy99 3y ago
Ideas and money are cheap and plentiful. Execution is everything and from what little I know about Altman that seems to be his strength.
- CPLX 3y ago
  What ventures has he executed successfully?
  - threeseed 3y ago
    OpenAI obviously. You can't argue that the company has not been impressively run and not just because of the quality of the models.
    - CPLX 3y ago
      As far as I can tell his tenure was marked by interpersonal conflict with most of the key players, after which he was suddenly fired amid allegations he was using his role as head of a non profit to advance his own personal interests.
      - threeseed 3y ago
        This is inside baseball. Nobody other than us care about the inner workings. At the end of the day he is responsible for building a $100b business, with a product users love, that has attracted developers in droves and built a highly successful partnership with Microsoft. And pretty sure the direction of the company is what the issue was. Not any side projects.
        CPLX 3y ago
        It’s not a company it’s a non-profit organization with a defined mission. Pretty sure that’s the crux of the problem here. The sort of interesting part of all these comment threads is the unstated assumption that a very fast growing multi billion dollar for profit tech company is an unmitigated “good thing” and anyone getting in the way of that is wrong. Not everyone thinks that or has that as a goal.

ethanbond 3y ago

This seems way, way more reasonable than WeWork. Maybe if Altman bought every datacenter and then nudged OpenAI toward renting them out, or if Altman bought the "Open" trademark and licensed it to OpenAI for a million dollars or whatever.

bmitc 3y ago
> This seems way, way more reasonable than WeWork. Really? Altman advertised and marketed himself as someone with no vested financial interest in OpenAI, but then he's going around creating companies with foreign states and companies that will then sell to the non-profit he's CEO of?
- satellite2 3y ago
  No one is saying that. If the chip making subsidiary was owned by OpenAI it could have very well allowed economies of scale and enable reducing dependency on Microsoft. Perfectly aligned with OpenAI goals.
  - freejazz 3y ago
    But it wouldn't be owned by OpenAI - that's the other poster's point. You're making it for them.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  To be clear, I don’t think that would be totally above board; it wouldn't seem ethical to my moral compass at least. I just think it’s far short of the completely indefensible, totally unambiguous, and obviously fraudulent behavior of Neumann. There are gradations of conflict and malfeasance.
  - bmitc 3y ago
    That's a fair and good point.

medler 3y ago

I don’t think it’s fair to jump to that conclusion, since he apparently never raised the money, founded the company, or developed the chips. The worst we can say is that his attention was divided and his goals may not have been aligned with OpenAI’s. And of course, I say this assuming the anonymous source is correct, which may not be the case.

Terretta 3y ago
Attentions divided seems to be the thing these days. Have you really made it as a SV CEO if you're not at least a 3-ring Tres Commas Club member? Popular picks seem to be any 3 of ad scaffolds, money processing, rent/gig vigs, energy, digital ledgers, big statistics, profit|altruism mashups, and, of course, the final frontier.

ignoramous 3y ago

> Adam Neumans tactics? Neuman's still at it with Flow? In line with that, more impetus (not that he needs any) for Sam to go ahead and do it anyway.