3 ms·

> I’d say it’s pretty fair to describe that as not owned. I'd agree with that. But you also ignored the very next statement. > even though he constantly was c

> I’d say it’s pretty fair to describe that as not owned. I'd agree with that. But you also ignored the very next statement. > even though he constantly was claiming to be an independent board member with no financial interest in the company Are you going to claim that a GP of a fund has no financial interest in the fund, too?

Havoc 2y ago
>Are you going to claim that a GP of a fund has no financial interest in the fund, too? We don't know either way. I've seen GP shares in the 100s of millions and I've seen GP shares that are notional $100. Just depends on the structuring. So from knowing he's GP the article can't reasonably conclude "he owned the OpenAI startup fund".