7 ms·

The employees won’t resign and I doubt Microsoft will match the hypothetical 90B valuation for their profit participation units, otherwise they would’ve left al

The employees won’t resign and I doubt Microsoft will match the hypothetical 90B valuation for their profit participation units, otherwise they would’ve left already (Microsoft has agreed to match). The investors have no power here and are effectively irrelevant. The remaining board had little to lose. The charter explicitly calls investment risky, so they’re good there too. > The Company's duty to this mission and the principles advanced in the OpenAl, Inc. Charter take precedence over any obligation to generate a profit. The Company may never make a profit, and the Company is under no obligation to do so. Even if the employees left I’m sure there is a class of person who would join still. My questions are who will be permanently ceo, and why did they foolishly accuse Altman of lying. Luckily for them everyone lies and they can just pick something, but it was a bad move.

dgacmu 3y ago
The investors have extremely deep pockets and good lawyers. I would not want to be on that board even with very good D&O insurance. It's not bulletproof, and a lawsuit by Altman, in particular, could be excluded from coverage and force them to defend themselves out of pocket.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  Even if they wanted to sue, the employees would have to make some decision, forcing the issue regardless so I doubt it matters.
  - dgacmu 3y ago
    I'm objecting to the comment that the remaining board has little to lose. It's possible for sufficiently motivated investors, former board members, and employees to make their life awfully miserable.
    - jacquesm 3y ago
      Seconded, the board has a lot to lose and short of making a deal that defangs the tigers I don't see them just moving on with their lives. Especially not those board members that weren't independently wealthy yet.
    - endisneigh 3y ago
      How so? They only have themselves to blame. Unless you’re saying they’re going to send death threats?
      - dgacmu 3y ago
        Defending yourself against several lawsuits can be extremely expensive, not to mention time consuming. While the board members are almost certainly covered by the company's D&O insurance (unless they're not, which would be a ridiculous clown show), there's still a lot of arguing that can happen about which parts are covered by the insurance and which parts may trigger personal liability. The point is not that these board members would lose the lawsuits - ianal and nobody knows the details well enough - it's that sufficient lawsuits can eat you before you win or lose them if you're not rich. AND subject you to discovery and a huge waste of time. "I will bury you in legal fees unless you resign" is not a very nice or principled negotiating tactic, but it's a potential one, and it should be weighing pretty heavily on the mind of any board members who don't have a spare million or two to toss in a fire.
        endisneigh 3y ago
        A lawsuit on what grounds? Firing a ceo is not illegal.
Pigalowda 3y ago
It's been less than 2 business days. It probably took you longer to decide to wash your car much less immediately pack up and move jobs.
golergka 3y ago
> I doubt Microsoft will match the hypothetical 90B valuation for their profit share units, otherwise they would’ve left already (Microsoft has agreed to match) If Microsoft won't, Google or Meta will.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  I doubt it. The ppus at a 90 billion valuation puts even late employees in the 7 figure territory. They can afford it, but ultimately the brand is what’s valuable. The only reason both Google and meta have not released something like gpt4 is because it’s not profitable and paying hundreds of millions for dozens of employees or billions for everyone isn’t really going to be worth it. Ironically, it would be better to let OpenAI die and let all of these people start their own things, and if one of them creates agi then pay that person the 90 billion.
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    The brand was a lot more valuable last Thursday. And it remains to be seen if it can recover or not.
- machinekob 3y ago
  Who would buy 500 people for 90B without tech, dataset, company culture they are pretty much your another excellent ML guys or team. They can make great things for sure but not more than your organisation will allow them Im pretty sure this big corporations aren't as fast moving and "we dont care about law/copyright" as ML startups, and people working in Meta/Google are as good as your typical OpenAI guy just with massive corporation on their back and this wont change.
  - golergka 3y ago
    Matching 90B valuation for compensations would only equal 90B if you assume that 100% of that valuation went to employees. Which sounds pretty far fetched, if you ask me.

dgacmu 3y ago

The investors have extremely deep pockets and good lawyers. I would not want to be on that board even with very good D&O insurance. It's not bulletproof, and a lawsuit by Altman, in particular, could be excluded from coverage and force them to defend themselves out of pocket.

endisneigh 3y ago
Even if they wanted to sue, the employees would have to make some decision, forcing the issue regardless so I doubt it matters.
- dgacmu 3y ago
  I'm objecting to the comment that the remaining board has little to lose. It's possible for sufficiently motivated investors, former board members, and employees to make their life awfully miserable.
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    Seconded, the board has a lot to lose and short of making a deal that defangs the tigers I don't see them just moving on with their lives. Especially not those board members that weren't independently wealthy yet.
  - endisneigh 3y ago
    How so? They only have themselves to blame. Unless you’re saying they’re going to send death threats?
    - dgacmu 3y ago
      Defending yourself against several lawsuits can be extremely expensive, not to mention time consuming. While the board members are almost certainly covered by the company's D&O insurance (unless they're not, which would be a ridiculous clown show), there's still a lot of arguing that can happen about which parts are covered by the insurance and which parts may trigger personal liability. The point is not that these board members would lose the lawsuits - ianal and nobody knows the details well enough - it's that sufficient lawsuits can eat you before you win or lose them if you're not rich. AND subject you to discovery and a huge waste of time. "I will bury you in legal fees unless you resign" is not a very nice or principled negotiating tactic, but it's a potential one, and it should be weighing pretty heavily on the mind of any board members who don't have a spare million or two to toss in a fire.
      - endisneigh 3y ago
        A lawsuit on what grounds? Firing a ceo is not illegal.

Pigalowda 3y ago

It's been less than 2 business days. It probably took you longer to decide to wash your car much less immediately pack up and move jobs.

golergka 3y ago

> I doubt Microsoft will match the hypothetical 90B valuation for their profit share units, otherwise they would’ve left already (Microsoft has agreed to match) If Microsoft won't, Google or Meta will.

endisneigh 3y ago
I doubt it. The ppus at a 90 billion valuation puts even late employees in the 7 figure territory. They can afford it, but ultimately the brand is what’s valuable. The only reason both Google and meta have not released something like gpt4 is because it’s not profitable and paying hundreds of millions for dozens of employees or billions for everyone isn’t really going to be worth it. Ironically, it would be better to let OpenAI die and let all of these people start their own things, and if one of them creates agi then pay that person the 90 billion.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  The brand was a lot more valuable last Thursday. And it remains to be seen if it can recover or not.
machinekob 3y ago
Who would buy 500 people for 90B without tech, dataset, company culture they are pretty much your another excellent ML guys or team. They can make great things for sure but not more than your organisation will allow them Im pretty sure this big corporations aren't as fast moving and "we dont care about law/copyright" as ML startups, and people working in Meta/Google are as good as your typical OpenAI guy just with massive corporation on their back and this wont change.
- golergka 3y ago
  Matching 90B valuation for compensations would only equal 90B if you assume that 100% of that valuation went to employees. Which sounds pretty far fetched, if you ask me.