3 ms·
See: https://www.axios.com/2023/11/18/how-openai-board-is-structured https://www.axios.com/2023/11/18/how-openai-board-is-structu... for the OpenAI Structure.
by ghshephard 4mo ago
See: https://www.axios.com/2023/11/18/how-openai-board-is-structured https://www.axios.com/2023/11/18/how-openai-board-is-structu... for the OpenAI Structure.
1) In order to fund research - this stuff costs 10s of billions of dollars - everyone, from Ilya, to Elon, to Sam - all agreed that they would require a profit-arm to raise money. Nobody was going to sponsor that 10s of billions of dollars to a non-profit.
2) The non profit is still there - and controls the commercial element.
- argee 4mo ago> Nobody was going to sponsor that 10s of billions of dollars to a non-profit How much has MacKenzie Scott donated to non-profits again? Seems like such a claim is on thin ice.
- alpinisme 4mo ago“Controls” That will be especially untrue after IPO when shareholders can claim there are fiduciary responsibilities that conflict with the non profit goals.
- super256 4mo agoThe non profit is a big shareholder of the commercial subsidiary
- JumpCrisscross 4mo ago> when shareholders can claim there are fiduciary responsibilities that conflict with the non profit goals The for-profit has fiduciary responsibility to the non-profit as well as other shareholders. The IPO doesn't really change that.
- alextheparrot 4mo agoThe for-profit is a PBC with the sane mission at the nonprofit [0] [0] https://openai.com/index/built-to-benefit-everyone/ https://openai.com/index/built-to-benefit-everyone/
- JumpCrisscross 4mo ago> non profit is still there - and controls the commercial element The non-profit hasn't controlled squat since they tried and failed to fire Sam Altman.