Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by craignatic on Saturday November 18, 2023 @02:29AM
(#38316546)
which ai regurgitate this ?
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by RuggedPineapple on Saturday November 18, 2023 @02:46AM
(#38316646)
Even a non-profit needs to focus on profitability, otherwise it's not going to exist for very long. All 'non-profit' means is it's prohibited from distributing its profit to shareholders. Ownership of a non-profit doesn't pay you. The non-profit itself still wants and is trying to generate more then it spends.
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by ytoawwhra92 on Saturday November 18, 2023 @02:50AM
(#38316677)
I addressed that concern in my third paragraph.
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by fuzztester on Saturday November 18, 2023 @03:38AM
(#38317009)
>They have a mutually beneficial relationship with a deep-pocketed partner who can perpetually fund their research in exchange for exclusive rights to commercialize any ground-breaking technology they develop and choose to allow to be commercialized.
Isn't this already a conflict of interest, or a clash, with this:
>OpenAI is a non-profit research organisation.
?
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by logifail on Saturday November 18, 2023 @04:07AM
(#38317215)
> ?
"OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company"
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by dagaci on Saturday November 18, 2023 @04:03AM
(#38317187)
It seems Microsoft was totally blind-sided by this event. If true then Trillion$+ Microsoft will now be scruitinizing the unpredictability and organizational risk associated with being dependant on the "unknown-random" + powrerful + passionate Illya and board who are vehemently opposed to the trajectory lead by altman. One solution would be to fork OpenAI and its efforts, one side with the vision lead by Illya and the other Sam.
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by nprateem on Saturday November 18, 2023 @10:32AM
(#38320641)
I don't think you know what intellectual property is.
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by dagaci on Sunday November 19, 2023 @07:27AM
(#38332034)
It seems you have jumped to many conclusion's in your thinking process without any prompting in your inference. I would suggest lowering your temperature ;)
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by nprateem on Sunday November 19, 2023 @08:19AM
(#38332391)
One doesn't simply 'fork' a business unless it has no/trivial IP, which OpenAI does not.
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by dagaci on Monday November 20, 2023 @03:49AM
(#38344959)
Forked:
https://twitter.com/satyanadella/status/1726509045803336122
"to lead a new advanced AI research team"
I would assume that Microsoft negotiated significant rights with regards to R&D and any IP.
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by nprateem on Monday November 20, 2023 @05:39AM
(#38346044)
I wouldn't call starting from zero forking
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by dagaci on Monday November 20, 2023 @07:35AM
(#38347082)
What is starting from zero exactly?
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by lll-o-lll on Saturday November 18, 2023 @04:21AM
(#38317314)
Thanks for that, it’s both interesting and informative. I still think my point stands. This is not a pure non-profit and the tension between commercial and research is both inevitable and necessary.
Let’s see how this plays out over the coming weeks. If we see an exodus of senior technical staff, then the conclusion will be that the board have made a significant error.
Re:OpenAI announces leadership transition
by mikotodomo on Saturday November 18, 2023 @09:41AM
(#38320141)
Yeah! People forget who we're talking about here. They put TONS of research in at an early stage to ensure that illegal thoughts and images cannot be generated by their product. This prevented an entire wave of mental harms against billions of humans that would have been unleashed otherwise if an irresponsible company like Snap were the ones to introduce AI to the world.
It's for-profit (capped-profit) subsidiary exists solely to be able to enable competitive compensation to its researchers to ensure they don't have to worry about the opportunity costs of working at a non-profit.
They have a mutually beneficial relationship with a deep-pocketed partner who can perpetually fund their research in exchange for exclusive rights to commercialize any ground-breaking technology they develop and choose to allow to be commercialized.
Aggressive commercialization is at odds with their raison d'être and they have no need for it to fund their research. For as long as they continue to push forward the state of the art in AI and build ground-breaking technology they can let Microsoft worry about commercialization and product development.
If a CEO is not just distracting but actively hampering an organisation's ability to fulfill its mission then their dismissal is entirely warranted.