3 ms·

The real news here is two-fold: new governance/recap of the for-profit, and operational shrink at the 501c3. As people here intuit, I think this makes the PBC

The real news here is two-fold: new governance/recap of the for-profit, and operational shrink at the 501c3. As people here intuit, I think this makes the PBC the ‘head’ functionally. That said, I would guess that the charity will be one of the wealthiest charities in the world in short order. I am certain that the strong recommendation from advisory is to have separate, independent boards. Especially with their public feud rolling and their feud-ee on the ascendant politically, they will need a very belt-and-suspenders approach. Imagining an independent board at the charity in exchange for a well funded pbc doesn’t seem like the worst of all worlds. As a reminder, being granted 501c3 status is a privilege in the US, maintaining that status takes active work. The punishment: removal of nonprofit status. I think if they wanted to ditch the mission they could, albeit maybe not without giving Elon some stock. Upshot: something like this was inevitable, I think. Anyway, I don’t hate it like the other commenters here do. Maybe we would prefer OpenAI get truly open, but then what? If Sam wanted he could open source everything, resign because the 501c3 can’t raise the money for the next step, and start a newco; that company would have many fewer restrictions. he is not doing that. I’m curious where we get in the next few years,

whamlastxmas 2y ago
I would guess they’re going to put as many expenses as possible on the nonprofit. For example, all the compute used for free tiers of ChatGPT will be charged to the nonprofit despite being a massive benefit to the for-profit. They may even charge the training costs, which will be in the billions, to the nonprofit as well
- bubaumba 2y ago
  Simple tax optimization. Like new billionaires promising to significant donations. a) they don't have to donate. b) they can immediately slash those promised donations from taxes.
  - rvba 2y ago
    How can one slash a non existant donation from taxes?
    - bubaumba 2y ago
      It's a trick. If you donate something to charity you can write it off the taxes. After IPOs most new billionaires did it, including Zuk. It's enough to just promise it publicly. There is no time limit, it can take years to 'donate', but writing off is immediate. To optimize it even further they create their own dummy charities full of friends and relatives.
- vessenes 2y ago
  Why do this? They lose a deduction that way.
  - whamlastxmas 2y ago
    They’re doing it bc they’re obligated to keep the non profit part alive for PR purposes. They have to put money there so they may as well use it how they want
thruway516 2y ago
>If Sam wanted he could open source everything, resign because the 501c3 can’t raise the money for the next step, and start a newco But can he really do that though? He's already lost a bit of talent with his current shenanigans. Could he attract the talent he would need and make lightning strike again, this time without the altruistic mission that drew a lot of that talent in the first place? Edit: Actually when I think of it he would probably earn a lot more respect if he did that. He could bank a lot of goodwill from open sourcing the code and being open and forthright with his intentions for once.

whamlastxmas 2y ago

I would guess they’re going to put as many expenses as possible on the nonprofit. For example, all the compute used for free tiers of ChatGPT will be charged to the nonprofit despite being a massive benefit to the for-profit. They may even charge the training costs, which will be in the billions, to the nonprofit as well

bubaumba 2y ago
Simple tax optimization. Like new billionaires promising to significant donations. a) they don't have to donate. b) they can immediately slash those promised donations from taxes.
- rvba 2y ago
  How can one slash a non existant donation from taxes?
  - bubaumba 2y ago
    It's a trick. If you donate something to charity you can write it off the taxes. After IPOs most new billionaires did it, including Zuk. It's enough to just promise it publicly. There is no time limit, it can take years to 'donate', but writing off is immediate. To optimize it even further they create their own dummy charities full of friends and relatives.
vessenes 2y ago
Why do this? They lose a deduction that way.
- whamlastxmas 2y ago
  They’re doing it bc they’re obligated to keep the non profit part alive for PR purposes. They have to put money there so they may as well use it how they want

thruway516 2y ago

>If Sam wanted he could open source everything, resign because the 501c3 can’t raise the money for the next step, and start a newco But can he really do that though? He's already lost a bit of talent with his current shenanigans. Could he attract the talent he would need and make lightning strike again, this time without the altruistic mission that drew a lot of that talent in the first place? Edit: Actually when I think of it he would probably earn a lot more respect if he did that. He could bank a lot of goodwill from open sourcing the code and being open and forthright with his intentions for once.