5 ms·

Also, the board made a decision without the board's chairman - Greg Brockman - involved. Also, it looks like the board didn't follow it's own internal rules a

Also, the board made a decision without the board's chairman - Greg Brockman - involved. Also, it looks like the board didn't follow it's own internal rules about meetings.

stingraycharles 3y ago
Also, the investors were not informed. It’s insane their largest investor and partner MSFT was blindsided by this. Anyone with just a little bit business sense knows this.
- MacsHeadroom 3y ago
  This is the board of the non-profit. It has no investors. The board does not answer to anyone.
  - BoiledCabbage 3y ago
    And how does this non-profit pay for its immense server costs?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - Obscurity4340 3y ago
      All corporations are basically Russian dolls at this point.
    - fakedang 3y ago
      The point still stands, the board does not have "investors". Microsoft knowingly donated to the for profit entity of the non profit. Open AI isn't a PBC, it's a 501c non profit. So the board can act that way, without the knowledge of the investors. That being said, this is a case of biting the hand that feeds you. An equivalent would be if a nonprofit humiliated its biggest donor. The donor can always walk away, claiming her future donations away, but whatever she's donated stays at the nonprofit.
      - lsh123 3y ago
        I hope IRS is watching this ;)
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        Watching what? A 501c3 being publicly pressured to make key governance decisions for the commercial benefits of investors in the 501c3's for-profit indirect subsidiary rather than the board's good-faith interpretation of its charitable purpose? Why would they care about that?
    - sotix 3y ago
      Non-profits still earn money recorded as net assets. They do not retain earnings at the end of the accounting period to store in shareholder’s equity because there are no shareholders that own the non-profit.
      - stingraycharles 3y ago
        You’re interpreting it as a lawyer would, rather than considering the real-world implications of this.
        sotix 3y ago
        I’m interpreting it as a CPA
    - dchichkov 3y ago
      It seems that OpenAI had switched to pre-paid billing. If anyone is interested helping, they can go and pre-pay. And support the non-profit. I'd guess, OpenAI without Sam Altman and YC/VC network is toothless. And Microsoft's/VC/media leverage over them is substantial.
  - cbozeman 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - astrange 3y ago
      Nonprofit boards literally don't answer to anyone. Company boards are responsible to shareholders, but nonprofits only have donors and that's not ownership. You can say you're not donating again, or all the employees can quit, but neither of those are legal issues for the board members. It just makes them look stupid. Though, I'm not sure if you can legally force a donation refund, or what it counts as if you cancel a billion in Azure credits.
      - cbozeman 3y ago
        [flagged]
        RandomLensman 3y ago
        If they are willing to let things end (because they see their mission as not being fulfillable etc.) and don't care much otherwise then that statement isn't far off. I really don't know how ideological this particular situation is, though.
        astrange 3y ago
        Are you going to claim something is specifically going to happen to them or are you just going to post about "what's really going on man"? Satya can assassinate them if he wants, but they're not in legal trouble. (Although, considering how much Helen Toner's resume reads like a CIA agent, he probably shouldn't try it.) I think they could survive as a useless AI safety lab too. After all, there's already been one for decades called MIRI and it has enough donors to stay open.
        l33t7332273 3y ago
        For anyone else wondering about Helen Toner’s resume: Director of Strategy and Foundational Research Grants at Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology Senior Research Analyst at Open Philanthropy, where she advised policymakers and grantmakers on AI policy and strategy Lived in Beijing, studying the Chinese AI ecosystem as a Research Affiliate of Oxford University’s Center for the Governance of AI MA in Security Studies from Georgetown BSc in Chemical Engineering and a Diploma in Languages from the University of Melbourne
- interestica 3y ago
  It's crazy how fast OpenAI put up the blog post
- yellow_postit 3y ago
  These board members are either not serious people or they let their perceived power over a ground breaking company go to their collective heads. Either way has been quite the misplayed checkers move.
baby 3y ago
where did you read about their internal rules?

Also, the board made a decision without the board's chairman - Greg Brockman - involved. Also, it looks like the board didn't follow it's own internal rules about meetings.

stingraycharles 3y ago

Also, the investors were not informed. It’s insane their largest investor and partner MSFT was blindsided by this. Anyone with just a little bit business sense knows this.

MacsHeadroom 3y ago
This is the board of the non-profit. It has no investors. The board does not answer to anyone.
- BoiledCabbage 3y ago
  And how does this non-profit pay for its immense server costs?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Obscurity4340 3y ago
    All corporations are basically Russian dolls at this point.
  - fakedang 3y ago
    The point still stands, the board does not have "investors". Microsoft knowingly donated to the for profit entity of the non profit. Open AI isn't a PBC, it's a 501c non profit. So the board can act that way, without the knowledge of the investors. That being said, this is a case of biting the hand that feeds you. An equivalent would be if a nonprofit humiliated its biggest donor. The donor can always walk away, claiming her future donations away, but whatever she's donated stays at the nonprofit.
    - lsh123 3y ago
      I hope IRS is watching this ;)
      - dragonwriter 3y ago
        Watching what? A 501c3 being publicly pressured to make key governance decisions for the commercial benefits of investors in the 501c3's for-profit indirect subsidiary rather than the board's good-faith interpretation of its charitable purpose? Why would they care about that?
  - sotix 3y ago
    Non-profits still earn money recorded as net assets. They do not retain earnings at the end of the accounting period to store in shareholder’s equity because there are no shareholders that own the non-profit.
    - stingraycharles 3y ago
      You’re interpreting it as a lawyer would, rather than considering the real-world implications of this.
      - sotix 3y ago
        I’m interpreting it as a CPA
  - dchichkov 3y ago
    It seems that OpenAI had switched to pre-paid billing. If anyone is interested helping, they can go and pre-pay. And support the non-profit. I'd guess, OpenAI without Sam Altman and YC/VC network is toothless. And Microsoft's/VC/media leverage over them is substantial.
- cbozeman 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - astrange 3y ago
    Nonprofit boards literally don't answer to anyone. Company boards are responsible to shareholders, but nonprofits only have donors and that's not ownership. You can say you're not donating again, or all the employees can quit, but neither of those are legal issues for the board members. It just makes them look stupid. Though, I'm not sure if you can legally force a donation refund, or what it counts as if you cancel a billion in Azure credits.
    - cbozeman 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - RandomLensman 3y ago
        If they are willing to let things end (because they see their mission as not being fulfillable etc.) and don't care much otherwise then that statement isn't far off. I really don't know how ideological this particular situation is, though.
      - astrange 3y ago
        Are you going to claim something is specifically going to happen to them or are you just going to post about "what's really going on man"? Satya can assassinate them if he wants, but they're not in legal trouble. (Although, considering how much Helen Toner's resume reads like a CIA agent, he probably shouldn't try it.) I think they could survive as a useless AI safety lab too. After all, there's already been one for decades called MIRI and it has enough donors to stay open.
        l33t7332273 3y ago
        For anyone else wondering about Helen Toner’s resume: Director of Strategy and Foundational Research Grants at Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology Senior Research Analyst at Open Philanthropy, where she advised policymakers and grantmakers on AI policy and strategy Lived in Beijing, studying the Chinese AI ecosystem as a Research Affiliate of Oxford University’s Center for the Governance of AI MA in Security Studies from Georgetown BSc in Chemical Engineering and a Diploma in Languages from the University of Melbourne
interestica 3y ago
It's crazy how fast OpenAI put up the blog post
yellow_postit 3y ago
These board members are either not serious people or they let their perceived power over a ground breaking company go to their collective heads. Either way has been quite the misplayed checkers move.

baby 3y ago

where did you read about their internal rules?