9 ms·
Satya Nadella: "We have all the rights and all the capability."
- HeWhoLurksLate 3y agoI didn't realize this situation was going to get even worse / muddier for this long when I first heard the headlines last Friday- but I guess that's to be expected with political intrigue at the top of one of the most impactful (or at least viewed as such) tech firms in the last couple years. Anybody have any insight at all as to how this ends?
- nickthegreek 3y agoAnyone who says the do is blowing smoke.
- jonbell 3y agoIn that spirit, here are some thoughts. * Sam goes to MS * Sam stays at OpenAI * Sam starts his own thing His own thing feels super unlikely because he’s said he’d go to MS. Staying at OpenAI feels super likely since the staff revolted. 50%? 75%? Going to MS seems likely but maybe slightly less so. 25%? 50%? Bookmark this comment because I am a genius and time will prove it. (All said in jest)
- jonbell 3y ago[Late update: I am a genius]
- tempodox 3y agoThe comment threads of previous articles have a lot of back seat drivers who act like they know it all.
- righthand 3y agoNo one has insight but I think the possibilities are already clear: 1. Microsoft is sold OpenAI 2. OpenAI makes some sort of deal to return to normal state and eventually heads roll on the board (as in not part of the deal but people are bought out) 3. (My favorite) OpenAI destroys Microsoft/Altman power grab and releases enough tech to the public
- topspin 3y ago> Anybody have any insight at all as to how this ends? Lawsuits. Interminable lawsuits, making boring headlines into the 2040s.
- jacquesm 3y agoNobody knows how this all ends but a lot hinges on whether D'Angelo & Co. are going to hightail it or cling to their boardseats. If the latter then OpenAI is probably done for. Oh, and another confident prediction is that lawyers will get richer.
- pug_mode 3y agoThe key quote in the article is "The actual contract Microsoft has with OpenAI is not publicly available", so we have to go by these imprecise quotes uttered by the CEO during podcasts, such as "We have all the rights and all the capability. I mean, look, right, if tomorrow, if OpenAI disappeared, I don't want any customer of ours to be worried about it, quite honestly, because we have all of the rights to continue the innovation, not just to serve the products". So, uh, does anyone have any ideas on what the situation actually is? If OpenAI ceased to exist, can Microsoft take the code, model weights, everything of ChatGPT 4, and just continue developing it and produce a new MS-ChatGPT based on it? That seems to be too good to be true. Why would OpenAI give away all of it's IP to Microsoft for that cheap, with the only limitation being MS can only make a 100X return + 20% a year, and MS does not own any IP which OpenAI deems to be at the level of AGI. A deal like that is surely worth more than 10B.
- toomuchtodo 3y agoI believe Satya because if he's lying, this is securities fraud.
- dylan604 3y agoThere's always the classic "I misspoke" backpedal available
- mym1990 3y agoSecurities fraud hasn’t stopped countless CEOs and people in high power positions from embellishing, lying, thieving their way to riches.
- dylan604 3y agoMusk in particular hasn't stopped.
- lazide 3y agoIf you already have riches, it’s a good way to lose them unless you’re really careful. Musk is a poster child on this front. Lying about a material fact in a way that would be trivial to prosecute you on, especially when you have a well funded adversary it impacts, and that would be more than happy to destroy you with such a lie, is a good way to lose riches. This is more like Ukraine announcing Putin’s pending invasion in advance.
- HankB99 3y agoOn Thursday of last week I sent a letter to a previous contact at MS asking that they consider a free "hobbyist" tier for copilot and not just a free trial for something I could not justify paying for in the long run. I had no idea the cataclysm my inquiry would launch!
- auspiv 3y agoIt is definitely worth $10/month. Very curious how you can not justify that
- dylan604 3y agoBecause I'm tired of rent-seeking society always wanting to keep a hand in my pocket.
- qwebfdzsh 3y agoI'll try that line at the checkout next time.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- supermatt 3y agoIs it? I must have been using it wrong during my trial, because I found using chatGPT produced better (js) code, and I can challenge it, which I don’t recall being able to do with copilot. I did receive an email today asking me to participate in some “learning journey” which I will do so if it’s now practical.
- HankB99 3y agoI'm retired on a fixed income. I do some programming, but not every day. I'm always interested in new things, but not enough in this case to spend $$$ on something that won't benefit me that much, not because there is no benefit but because it's not something I do a lot. I suppose on the other hand I'm a little spoiled by all of the free (as in beer) tools available today. There was a time I paid well over $100/month for MSDN to get equivalent stuff from MS. (I see it's just under $100/month today so I may be misremembering the pricing.)
- manyoso 3y agoThe key part of the quote is this, "I don't want any customer of ours to be worried about it"
- onetokeoverthe 3y ago[dead]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tucif 3y agoBloomberg's Austin Carr says "Any employees who do join Microsoft can’t simply replicate the work they were doing on OpenAI properties like GPT-5 without inviting a nightmare of claims over trade-secret theft." But doesn't really explain why, I wonder if there's any substance to it in the light of Satya's comments about having the rights to "continue the innovation". https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-11-21/microsoft-hiring-sam-altman-won-t-solve-its-openai-problem https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-11-21/micros...
- civilitty 3y agoIANAL but regardless of whether they’re actually infringing, even the appearance of impropriety would give OpenAI cause to sue the employees directly. Most people simply aren’t equipped financially and emotionally to defend against a well resourced corp so it’d be a bloodbath of epic proportions. Even if Microsoft paid for everyone’s legal fees, if the lawsuits don’t get thrown out quickly the stress alone would grind the entire division to a halt. If Microsoft does end up poaching the entire team, everyone will be walking on eggshells with legal breathing down their neck.
- jacquesm 3y agoOpenAI won't sue anybody. They are lucky to exist by Jan. 1st. And if they do it will be with substantially diminished stature unless they can reverse this whole shitshow (unlikely).
- himaraya 3y agoWhy? The nonprofit will certainly continue existing in name, if nothing else.
- jacquesm 3y agoLet's see. It all depends on how high the temperature will go up from here. I give it 70/30 in favor of OpenAI still existing Jan. 1st 2024 in an operational aspect, with a lesser chance of them being defunct but still existing as a legal entity. For every hour that the new CEO doesn't come out to start repairing their reputation that chance goes up.
- mupuff1234 3y agoIt's a fairly vague statement, and imo raises more doubts than confidence. If a CEO is busy trying to manage the stock than that should raise some suspicion.
- upwardbound 3y ago> "We have all the rights and all the capability." This statement could be interpreted as a thinly-veiled threat. When viewed in conjunction with Satya's efforts to hire 700+ OpenAI team members in bulk, any attempt at intimidation may constitute an illegal practice known as a workforce raid. Described here https://twitter.com/8teAPi/status/1726981483032977791 https://twitter.com/8teAPi/status/1726981483032977791
- jacquesm 3y agoCheck out that letter the other day: https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/11/19/a-statement-from-microsoft-chairman-and-ceo-satya-nadella/ https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/11/19/a-statement-from... It's not quite like waking up next to a horse's head but it says 'Sam gets the part' regardless of what you clowns will cook up next and don't stand in my way.
- upwardbound 3y agoYep.. .. and..... Here's yet another threat: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/nov/21/microsoft-ceo-nadella-openai-altman https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/nov/21/microsoft...
- jacquesm 3y ago“As a partner, I think it does deserve you to be consulted on the big decisions.” Especially big decisions that potentially annihilate your investment.
- upwardbound 3y agoCompare and contrast Satya's exact wording in his communications about mass job offers with that of his much savvier counterpart Marc Benioff (CEO of Salesforce). https://x.com/8teAPi/status/1726983321329250666?s=20 https://x.com/8teAPi/status/1726983321329250666?s=20 Marc or his counsel very precisely worded the tweet to tiptoe around any risk of it being construed as workforce raiding. Satya did not take this precaution, presumably because Satya has never heard of workforce raiding and is acting increasingly recklessly, as he makes his way through this sleep-deprived weekend fueled by a blinding desire to capture all of OpenAI and win it all.
- polygamous_bat 3y agoEven if Satya is lying through his teeth, how much money and power would a gutted OpenAI have to devote to a protracted legal battle against Microsoft’s army of lawyers? It feels like robbing a person with cancer and hoping that they die before the case gets to the court, which feels very on brand with how Microsoft used to play things in early windows days.
- jacquesm 3y agoYes, that's an excellent question, and my guess is 'none' because if they do MS will countersue immediately, they basically offered a truce with that message the other day: "we won't sue you and pretend everything is normal as long as you let us do whatever we want to do". With a nice flower arrangement around the words and if you look closely you'll see that each of the flowers is subtly embossed with the face of one of MS's top legal eagles.
- krisoft 3y ago> we won't sue you Sue who? And for what? Are you proposing that they sue the board for firing the CEO? What would be the theory?
- polygamous_bat 3y agoI assume Microsoft will countersue with their own interpretation of the contract. However baloney that is, they only have to drag the case along until the former shell of OpenAI runs out of money and gives up the ghost. They could spend $10Bn on this and still come out ahead compared to buying OpenAI at market rate.
- jacquesm 3y agoThe fact that it annihilated their investment comes to mind. The only defense the board would have is that they absolutely needed to fire the CEO to protect their precious non-profit charter. But for that to be the case they would need to show their homework. I don't see that happening and so they may well be exposed. At least two of the remaining board members are not positioned at all to take on Microsoft in a fight like that, they'll fold like chopsticks. Microsoft can keep this up for a decade if they want and not lose money on it.
- newsclues 3y agoAnd the lawyers and bank account to smooth over any issues that arise.
- ofslidingfeet 3y ago"Now nothing will stop us from persuading the public to use Edge."
- SilverBirch 3y agoI think people are being too legalistic with this language. OpenAI don't have some golden contract that prevents MSFT from building their own LLMs. That's it. If OpenAI disappeared tomorrow would MSFT just add a bunch of their employees to OpenAI's github repo? Of course not. But it's not a total secret how to build LLMs and they're going to poach all the best staff anyway. The more important point here is Satya is saying "Shareholders don't worry" and "Board of OpenAI, don't fuck about you need us more than we need you"
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoSo, they really owned OpenAI all along? Even though they own 49%, he is saying, we can take it all anyway?
- righthand 3y agoNo he’s saying we can steal the employees and rebuild it. He just wants people to think there would be no downtime but there will be regardless what happens. It’s stock price protection.
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoBut also it said the model, and data, and code. What is ownership or control then? What does 49% mean if you can just take it all.
- supermatt 3y ago> the company deliberately kept its stake at 49%, likely to sidestep antitrust concerns. And yet a “Person of Significant Control” in UK corps would need only a 25% share (or voting rights), OR be deemed to have “significant influence”. Why are competition laws so backwards :(
- alexdoesstuff 3y agoI feel people tend to forget that MSFT owns only 49% of OpenAI. There are people owning the rest, and they presumably have some interest in protecting their share of the company from MSFT's aggressive grab. Even if all new development goes to hell, GPT-4 and co are still worth something. Maybe MSFT really got the deal of a lifetime where they (a) tricked the FTC to not consider anything they are doing to touch antitrust laws due to "only buying 49% of the business" and (b) have a way to "extract" the core assets of OpenAI to the detriment of the remaining shareholders. That's not impossible given the quaint structure OpenAI has and the unusual structuring of the deal with MSFT, but would be quite surprising.