2 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2023
    1. My understanding is that some members of the board genuinely felt Altman was dishonest and unreliable in his communications with them, sources tell me. Some members of the board believe that they couldn’t oversee the company because they couldn’t believe what Altman was saying. And yet, the existence of a nonprofit board was a key justification for OpenAI’s supposed trustworthiness. I don’t think any of us really knows enough right now to urge the board to make a hasty decision. I want you to consider a couple things here:

      Fascinating. We need more people to take a break and say "we don't know".

    1. This is, quite obviously, a phenomenal outcome for Microsoft. The company already has a perpetual license to all OpenAI IP (short of artificial general intelligence), including source code and model weights; the question was whether it would have the talent to exploit that IP if OpenAI suffered the sort of talent drain that was threatened upon Altman and Brockman’s removal. Indeed they will, as a good portion of that talent seems likely to flow to Microsoft; you can make the case that Microsoft just acquired OpenAI for $0 and zero risk of an antitrust lawsuit.

      I was just telling someone that OpenAI must decide who they wants to be. Do they want to be AWS/Azure or do they want to '"freely collaborate" with other institutions and researchers by making its patents and research open to the public'?

      Well it looks like the choice was made for them. They just changed the name from "OpenAI" to... "Microsoft":