6 ms·

About a year ago (I believe), Sam Altman touted his mission to promote safe AI with claims that he has no equity in OpenAI and was never interested in getting a

About a year ago (I believe), Sam Altman touted his mission to promote safe AI with claims that he has no equity in OpenAI and was never interested in getting any. Look where we are now, well played Sam.

upwardbound 2y ago
Does that amount to making a false forward-looking financial statement? (Specifically his claim that he wasn’t interested in getting equity in the future.) This claim he made was likely helpful in ensuring the OpenAI team’s willingness to bring him back after he was temporarily ousted by the board last year for alleged governance issues. (Basically: “don’t worry about me guys, I’m in this for the mission, not personal enrichment”) Since his claim likely helped him get re-hired, he can’t claim it was immaterial. I really hope someone from the SEC scrutinizes him someday. The Singularity is too important to let it be run by someone with questionable ethics.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- jacobsimon 2y ago
  My unprofessional take: The SEC is concerned primarily with protecting investors. If anything, changing to a normal for-profit structure and removing the cap on returns would be viewed as more investor/market-friendly than their current structure, which is partly to blame for what unfolded last year.
- theGnuMe 2y ago
  It’s not a public company? Not sure why the sec would get involved.
  - throwawaymaths 2y ago
    This. Though the secretary of state wherever it's domiciled might get involved.
  - WrongAssumption 2y ago
    Because the SEC regulates private companies. https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/capital-raising-building-blocks/private-companies-sec https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/capital-raisi...
onelesd 2y ago
Sam and all the others. At this point, there should be required courses in college to teach this seemingly required skill to future corporate USA.
- apwell23 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - wheels 2y ago
    Stripe was founded when Sam Altman was 25. Loopt, Sam's first company, was founded when Sam was 20, and was Sam's mechanism for meeting Paul Graham, so this story is pretty obviously wrong at some level.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
apwell23 2y ago
[flagged]
- baoha 2y ago
  To be fair both of them probably didn't imagine Stripe would be the one today. You can apply the same logic for any successful companies, like the guy who gave up 10% of Apple for some changes.
  - manquer 2y ago
    There is a difference between not imagining it will be valued at 100B and not imagining it will be 1B+ or a 100M exit. It is quite likely they knew the latter as relatively low risk expected outcome . Even at 100M exit, which by valley standards (even in 2010s) is not a lot, 1-2% (after further rounds of dilution) would have yielded 1-2M return . A 200x return for very little downside i.e. a gift . There is a reason why there is FOMO and little due diligence for really hot startups amongst VCs , most times it is about access to the round which is difficult rather than risk of returns, we only read about the spectacular failures like FTX . We don’t hear about the Stripe, AirBnb, or Figma, OpenAI or spaceX funding rounds .
  - apwell23 2y ago
    > probably didn't imagine Stripe would be the one today I guess being michael jordan of listening does't help with imagination
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- wheels 2y ago
  Weridly this is the second time this has been repeated in this thread, but Sam wasn't even a teenager anymore when he met PG the first time (but would have just turned 20), and was 25 when Stripe was founded, so your story is obviously wrong.
  - blast 2y ago
truculent 2y ago
> well played Sam Is it well played if you simply decide to lie brazenly? Anyone can win at monopoly if they decide to steal from the bank.
- grogenaut 2y ago
  I can confirm this is the only way I win at monopoly. My strategy for A$$hole is more devious and involves going from ass to president with a similar strategy to my monopoly strategy then making no one want to play again as president. As a great man, Charles Wopr, once said: the only winning move is not to play.
zombiwoof 2y ago
Sam Bullshit Altman

upwardbound 2y ago

Does that amount to making a false forward-looking financial statement? (Specifically his claim that he wasn’t interested in getting equity in the future.) This claim he made was likely helpful in ensuring the OpenAI team’s willingness to bring him back after he was temporarily ousted by the board last year for alleged governance issues. (Basically: “don’t worry about me guys, I’m in this for the mission, not personal enrichment”) Since his claim likely helped him get re-hired, he can’t claim it was immaterial. I really hope someone from the SEC scrutinizes him someday. The Singularity is too important to let it be run by someone with questionable ethics.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
jacobsimon 2y ago
My unprofessional take: The SEC is concerned primarily with protecting investors. If anything, changing to a normal for-profit structure and removing the cap on returns would be viewed as more investor/market-friendly than their current structure, which is partly to blame for what unfolded last year.
theGnuMe 2y ago
It’s not a public company? Not sure why the sec would get involved.
- throwawaymaths 2y ago
  This. Though the secretary of state wherever it's domiciled might get involved.
- WrongAssumption 2y ago
  Because the SEC regulates private companies. https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/capital-raising-building-blocks/private-companies-sec https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/capital-raisi...

onelesd 2y ago

Sam and all the others. At this point, there should be required courses in college to teach this seemingly required skill to future corporate USA.

apwell23 2y ago
[flagged]
- wheels 2y ago
  Stripe was founded when Sam Altman was 25. Loopt, Sam's first company, was founded when Sam was 20, and was Sam's mechanism for meeting Paul Graham, so this story is pretty obviously wrong at some level.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

apwell23 2y ago

[flagged]

baoha 2y ago
To be fair both of them probably didn't imagine Stripe would be the one today. You can apply the same logic for any successful companies, like the guy who gave up 10% of Apple for some changes.
- manquer 2y ago
  There is a difference between not imagining it will be valued at 100B and not imagining it will be 1B+ or a 100M exit. It is quite likely they knew the latter as relatively low risk expected outcome . Even at 100M exit, which by valley standards (even in 2010s) is not a lot, 1-2% (after further rounds of dilution) would have yielded 1-2M return . A 200x return for very little downside i.e. a gift . There is a reason why there is FOMO and little due diligence for really hot startups amongst VCs , most times it is about access to the round which is difficult rather than risk of returns, we only read about the spectacular failures like FTX . We don’t hear about the Stripe, AirBnb, or Figma, OpenAI or spaceX funding rounds .
- apwell23 2y ago
  > probably didn't imagine Stripe would be the one today I guess being michael jordan of listening does't help with imagination
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
wheels 2y ago
Weridly this is the second time this has been repeated in this thread, but Sam wasn't even a teenager anymore when he met PG the first time (but would have just turned 20), and was 25 when Stripe was founded, so your story is obviously wrong.
- blast 2y ago

truculent 2y ago

> well played Sam Is it well played if you simply decide to lie brazenly? Anyone can win at monopoly if they decide to steal from the bank.

grogenaut 2y ago
I can confirm this is the only way I win at monopoly. My strategy for A$$hole is more devious and involves going from ass to president with a similar strategy to my monopoly strategy then making no one want to play again as president. As a great man, Charles Wopr, once said: the only winning move is not to play.

zombiwoof 2y ago

Sam Bullshit Altman