3 ms·

I would call for an attempt to restore the nonprofit structure and the board, using a CA government intervention that regulates nonprofits. Sam Altman certainl

I would call for an attempt to restore the nonprofit structure and the board, using a CA government intervention that regulates nonprofits. Sam Altman certainly was very perceptive -https://blog.samaltman.com/machine-intelligence-part-1 https://blog.samaltman.com/machine-intelligence-part-1 But it does seem that the concentration of power was getting a bit high. And the fact that the nonprofit that was created to balance exactly that had disintegrated is not a good sign. This structure of the nonprofit seems to be a very smart move by some very smart people. Visionaries. I’d say it needs to be restored and rebalanced.

agloe_dreams 3y ago
This is not a structure that will actually work in the real world and everyone involved knows it. Why? Because the profit half is why the non-profit would ever have power. If the company is led to slow progress down or reduce profit motivations, other companies will fill that gap and the non-profit doesnt have power over AI anymore. To be the source of AI, to control it, means to have the money to pay the best, to build the sort of place that AI dev can thrive. Only then can you control what gets out there. This will lead a rift between the pro-profit and non-profit halves and when the investors and clients get limited by the nonprofits, they will work to kill the non-profit. This is what reality, not dream company world, looks like. Might I add, the board was stacked from the start. They have a competitor on the board regulating the profit half. Few if any of them are actually respectable or successful leaders. This ends with the Board gone and replaced with one pro-profit for MS, or MS holding all the cards internally. No version of this actually will work long-term and it never would. People inventing it thought they could make a dream company of sorts with no downsides, just non-profit smarts running a profitable company...but it isn't a balanced system. The money wins out.
mminer237 3y ago
OpenAI is incorporated in Delaware, so it would be up to the Delaware attorney general to make any direction as to the non-profit purpose, which she has thus far ignored.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Someone would have to petition for intervention first.

agloe_dreams 3y ago

This is not a structure that will actually work in the real world and everyone involved knows it. Why? Because the profit half is why the non-profit would ever have power. If the company is led to slow progress down or reduce profit motivations, other companies will fill that gap and the non-profit doesnt have power over AI anymore. To be the source of AI, to control it, means to have the money to pay the best, to build the sort of place that AI dev can thrive. Only then can you control what gets out there. This will lead a rift between the pro-profit and non-profit halves and when the investors and clients get limited by the nonprofits, they will work to kill the non-profit. This is what reality, not dream company world, looks like. Might I add, the board was stacked from the start. They have a competitor on the board regulating the profit half. Few if any of them are actually respectable or successful leaders. This ends with the Board gone and replaced with one pro-profit for MS, or MS holding all the cards internally. No version of this actually will work long-term and it never would. People inventing it thought they could make a dream company of sorts with no downsides, just non-profit smarts running a profitable company...but it isn't a balanced system. The money wins out.

mminer237 3y ago

OpenAI is incorporated in Delaware, so it would be up to the Delaware attorney general to make any direction as to the non-profit purpose, which she has thus far ignored.

jacquesm 3y ago
Someone would have to petition for intervention first.