https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7645482
frik on April 25, 2014:
> The Nokia fate will be remembered as hostile takeover. Everything worked out in the favor of Microsoft in the end. Though Windows Phone/Tablet have low market share, a lot lower than expected.
> * Stephen Elop the former Microsoft employee (head of the Business Division) and later Nokia CEO with his infamous "Burning Platform" memo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Elop#CEO_of_Nokia
> * Some former Nokia employees called it "Elop = hostile takeover of a company for a minimum price through CEO infiltration": https://gizmodo.com/how-nokia-employees-are-reacting-to-the-...
For the record: I don't actually believe that there is an evil Microsoft master plan. I just find it sad that Microsoft takes over cool stuff and inevitably turns it into Microsoft™ stuff or abandons it.
What planet are you living on?
As for employees end masse acting publicly disloyal to their employer, usually not a good career move.
Wut?
This is software, not law. The industry is notorious for people jumping ship every couple of years.
The only part left of the non-profit was the board, all the employees and operations are in the for-profit entity. Since employees now demand the board should resign there will be nothing left of the non-profit after this. Puppets that are aligned with for-profit interests will be installed instead and the for-profit can act like a regular for-profit without being tied to the old ideals.
Besides, considering it was four against two, they would’ve needed him for the decisive vote anyway.
I’m not sure why you wouldn’t trust Sam Altman‘s account of what Ilya did and didn’t do considering Ilya himself is siding with Sam now.
Altman showed nothing why he would or wouldn’t lie. If he is really wanted to do things against the board, or the mission, or whatever, then it is in his interest to lie. However, we still don’t know anything, so we can’t exclude any possibilities. That means that interested parties’ statements’ value is almost nothing. It’s easy to lie in muddy waters.
Furthermore, it's consistent with all available information that they would prefer to continue without Sam, but they would rather have Sam than lose the company, and now that Microsoft has put its foot down, they'd rather settle.
This is an argumentum ad odium fallacy
Which is to say, what's your alternative for a better explanation? (other than the "cui bono?" one, that is).
also known as "never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence", which to my gut sounds at least as likely as a cui bono explanation tbh (which is not to be seen as an endorsement of the view that cui bono = conspiracy...)
> Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity (1), but don't rule out malice. (2)
Nevertheless I agree with you and think (2) is wise to always keep in mind. I love Hanlon's Razor but people definitely should take it literally as written and/or as law.
Yeah M$ hasnt had a good reputation. I finally left Windows this year because I'm afraid of them after Win11.
2023/4 will be the year of the Linux Desktop in retrospect. (or at least my family's religion deemed it)
They're a $2+ trillion dollar company. They're doing something right.
The idea that Microsoft is going to control OpenAI does not exactly fill me with confidence.
I've been using Linux for a while. Since 2010 I sort of actively try to avoid using anything else. (On desktops/laptops.)
Minecraft teaches phonics. Anyway, my 4 year old can read books. He doesnt even practice the homework in his preschool because he just reads the words that everyone else sounds out.