44 ms·

> I thought everyone wanted him back, and that's why he was able to return. Everyone working at OpenAI wanted him back. Which only includes people who have a s

by tasuki 2y ago

> I thought everyone wanted him back, and that's why he was able to return. Everyone working at OpenAI wanted him back. Which only includes people who have a significant motivation to see OpenAI succeed financially. Also, there are rumours he can be vindictive. For all I know, that might be a smear campaign. But if that were the case, and half the people at OpenAI wanted him back, the other half would have a motivation to follow so as not to get whatever punishment from Sam.

Aeolun 2y ago
It sounds to me people working in AI these days have a lot more options than being fraid of a particularly vindictive man.
- strogonoff 2y ago
  Between just working on ML tech and working on ML tech with US$XXX billion of Microsoft’s money—salaries aside—imaginably, having access to nuclear plants worth of energy, compute power and cutting edge GPUs, legal department for defending intellectual property violation, etc., makes for a very different value proposition compared to some other startup in the space. (The self-image of working at a company allegedly “advancing humanity” likely helps, too.)
  - Aeolun 2y ago
    True to some extend. But if you have OpenAI on your resume I have to imagine there’s no necessity for your next job to be much different (e.g. go to any FAANG)
    - strogonoff 2y ago
      I think (based on very shallow research) among FAANG behemoths Meta is the closest in terms of resources thrown at ML, but it’s an ad company that hasn’t got such a “we advance humanity” image. Equity vesting and that sort of stuff can additionally make moving companies a problematic prospect, even if the new place offered a competitive salary…
      - psb217 2y ago
        Yeah, Meta pays well, but they probably wouldn't match the $10M equity pile that some generic engineer or researcher who joined 1 year before ChatGPT dropped could be sitting on. Ofc, the equity->cash conversion rate for OpenAI pseudo stocks isn't clear, but those paper gains would be tough to abandon.

by tasuki 2y ago

Aeolun 2y ago

It sounds to me people working in AI these days have a lot more options than being fraid of a particularly vindictive man.

strogonoff 2y ago
Between just working on ML tech and working on ML tech with US$XXX billion of Microsoft’s money—salaries aside—imaginably, having access to nuclear plants worth of energy, compute power and cutting edge GPUs, legal department for defending intellectual property violation, etc., makes for a very different value proposition compared to some other startup in the space. (The self-image of working at a company allegedly “advancing humanity” likely helps, too.)
- Aeolun 2y ago
  True to some extend. But if you have OpenAI on your resume I have to imagine there’s no necessity for your next job to be much different (e.g. go to any FAANG)
  - strogonoff 2y ago
    I think (based on very shallow research) among FAANG behemoths Meta is the closest in terms of resources thrown at ML, but it’s an ad company that hasn’t got such a “we advance humanity” image. Equity vesting and that sort of stuff can additionally make moving companies a problematic prospect, even if the new place offered a competitive salary…
    - psb217 2y ago
      Yeah, Meta pays well, but they probably wouldn't match the $10M equity pile that some generic engineer or researcher who joined 1 year before ChatGPT dropped could be sitting on. Ofc, the equity->cash conversion rate for OpenAI pseudo stocks isn't clear, but those paper gains would be tough to abandon.