OpenAI To Remove Non-Profit Control and Give Sam Altman Equity (reuters.com)
- Reference: 0175133323
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/09/25/2141233/openai-to-remove-non-profit-control-and-give-sam-altman-equity
- Source link: https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/openai-remove-non-profit-control-give-sam-altman-equity-sources-say-2024-09-25/
> The OpenAI non-profit will continue to exist and own a minority stake in the for-profit company, the sources said. The move could also have implications for how the company manages AI risks in a new governance structure. [...] The details of the proposed corporate structure, first reported by Reuters, highlight significant governance changes happening behind the scenes at one of the most important AI companies. The plan is still being hashed out with lawyers and shareholders and the timeline for completing the restructuring remains uncertain, the sources said.
"We remain focused on building AI that benefits everyone, and we're working with our board to ensure that we're best positioned to succeed in our mission. The non-profit is core to our mission and will continue to exist," an OpenAI spokesperson said.
Earlier today, OpenAI's chief technology officer Mira Murati [3]announced her departure from the company. Her resignation follows the departures of founders [4]Ilya Sutskever and [5]John Schulman .
Further reading: [6]OpenAI Pitched White House On Unprecedented Data Center Buildout
[1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/openai-remove-non-profit-control-give-sam-altman-equity-sources-say-2024-09-25/
[2] https://slashdot.org/story/24/09/12/0549238/openai-fundraising-set-to-vault-startups-valuation-to-150-billion
[3] https://slashdot.org/story/24/09/25/1959208/openai-cto-mira-murati-is-leaving-firm
[4] https://slashdot.org/story/24/05/14/2323250/openais-chief-scientist-and-co-founder-is-leaving-the-company
[5] https://slashdot.org/story/24/08/06/0411247/openai-co-founder-john-schulman-is-joining-anthropic
[6] https://yro.slashdot.org/story/24/09/25/1853232/openai-pitched-white-house-on-unprecedented-data-center-buildout
Try hard (Score:3)
They are trying to convince people they will actually make a profit.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, and just in time for Altman to cash out billions before the house of cards crumbles.
Re: Try hard (Score:2)
Once you have eyeballs, you have profits.
Is it just me? (Score:2)
Sam seems like AI poison more than anything.
People bitch about AI, but AI isn't the promblem (Score:4, Insightful)
Capitalism is the problem.
Using artists' work? Well, it really isn't that much a moral quandry if you're doing it to create more art for art's sake. More art in the world is, generally a good thing in the absence of exploitation. However, if you're building on others' art to make a profit, and the original artist has to toil under a profit motive to survive, then the society centered on profit motive is the root cause problem.
Taking labor from physical or knowledge workers and giving it to automation and AI...? Well, in a capitalist system that's bad because you're also diminishing their living conditions because labor for hire is the status quo. In a society organized primarily against profit motive, taking toil away from everyday people is actually a good thing.
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong again. This is just one greedy asshole (Sam) cashing in on the company.
Re: (Score:2)
Are capitalism and "one greedy asshole" somehow different things here? OpenAI are literally switching from an ostensibly prosocial nonprofit, to capital-centric company, with Altman leading the charge and seemingly benefiting the most. I fail to see how I'm "wrong again" when my original point was about a system where greedy assholes ruin AI.
Re:People bitch about AI, but AI isn't the promble (Score:4, Informative)
Capitalism is not the problem.
Profit-seeking behavior is a very deep survival instinct. Animals do things because those things benefit them. That's literally how they survive.
We put a few layers of abstraction between effort expended and rewards gained (e.g. money), but the basic formula is the same: personal benefit is the incentive to work.
This silly notion that people will be happy to just work and work at their max capacity "for the greater good," and then be happy to receive whatever baseline providence the government manages to doll out to everyone equally, has consistently failed to produce the promised utopia.
No system is perfect, and capitalism is not perfect either. But despite all its imperfections, it still works better than all the alternatives, so long is it is managed by a government that understands economics and has teeth when it comes to the task of maintaining open competition within the market (which is to say: proper regulation and trust-busting).
Re: (Score:3)
Humans can't be happy impersonating a Ferengi society. Funny you should be on Slashdot claiming Open Source can't work without a profit motive.
Re: (Score:2)
You just deliberately misquoted me, and you know it. It is a bad faith argument used by people who lack the ability to make good arguments.
What I was talking about was communism . It doesn't work as an economic model. It doesn't ever produce the promised utopia.
This fact says nothing about whether or not the free open source movement can produce good and reliable software. It should be quite obvious that volunteers exist and can contribute as they please while operating within a capitalistic society. Th
Re: (Score:1)
Or those contributing to open source value something other than money/profit in return for their work. It's still Capitalistic in nature. It's just a different reward that motivates those people/companies.
Capitalism just happens because it is natural. People are motivated by doing things that benefit them (or make them feel good). And that's why all the other contrived systems fail - they ignore the basics of human nature. If people are not rewarded for doing more than the bare minimum, they have no de
Re: (Score:2)
The notion that all people must work at their max capacity is just wrong. There are several systems and contexts where people are working to their max capacity and they are being very unhappy. Why should this be an end in itself? The fact that capitalism works only means that it is capable of sustain itself over time.
Re: (Score:3)
> Capitalism is not the problem...Profit-seeking behavior is a very deep survival instinct. Animals do things because those things benefit them.
First off, logical flaw alert - you have equated "capitalism" with "profit-seeking behavior". As you point out, even animals have a version of profit seeking, but as far as I can tell they don't have anything like capitalism. Equating capitalism with profit-seeking is misdirection, whether you intended it or not.
Second, you might want to be careful about what 'brand' of capitalism you're talking about. In today's world, the only significant one is corporate capitalism, with its limited liability, its shield
Re: (Score:2)
> Second, you might want to be careful about what 'brand' of capitalism you're talking about. In today's world, the only significant one is corporate capitalism, with its limited liability, its shielding of criminal perpetrators from the consequences of their actions, and its ongoing and successful attempts to subvert freedom and democratic governance.
What you're describing isn't capitalism. It's more like feudalism, or some related oligarchic system. Actual capitalism had a lot to do with replacing those sys
Re: (Score:2)
There will always be corruption no matter what we do. In government as well as among the wealthy elite business owners. It's a given. It's a feature of humanity, so it will be present in every social system. There is no escaping it. Nor is there any kind of ideal structure we can erect that will prevent it.
All we can do is adapt to it, and attempt to manage it. Eternal vigilance, and all that. Apply what political leverage we have towards noble causes and holding corrupt actors as accountable as we c
Re: (Score:2)
> No system is perfect, and capitalism is not perfect either. But despite all its imperfections, it still works better than all the alternatives
The US kneecaps every non-capitalist system with sanctions (or worse) wherever and whenever they emerge. Every. Single. Time.
With AI about to take everyone's jobs it would have been nice if the world had been able to try out some alternative systems.
Re: (Score:2)
> This silly notion that people will be happy to just work and work at their max capacity "for the greater good," and then be happy to receive whatever market rate has consistently failed to produce the promised utopia.
That would be silly, we don't expect people to be happy with their pay. We expect them to work, and at their maximum capacity, regardless what they make. Who said anything about utopia, be happy to have a job.
What makes this different, who's on top?
Re: People bitch about AI, but AI isn't the prombl (Score:2)
Capitalism is unavoidable ... *unregulated* capitalism (the actual problem) is not.
Re: (Score:2)
> Capitalism is unavoidable ...
I reject that notion. That notion necessitates that humanity never achieves a Star Trek future.
I would say that capitalism is unavoidable in societies where psychopathy is rewarded. That isn't to say we can't create a society where psychopaths aren't allowed to run things.
Hoarding of resources to the denial of others, particularly at a level where survival is at stake, is not actually general human nature. Or even in the nature of social animals. A chimpanzee hoarding a thousand bananas while other chimps s
Re: (Score:2)
a society where psychopaths aren't allowed to run things.
If creating such a society were easy, we would have done so by now. We have been at this for over two millennia now, and have not done so, despite very valiant efforts.
How would you suggest that leaders be chosen? By free election? Well ok, how does that play out? Your honest and noble souls mostly don't seek after power, so mostly don't even apply. The few who do apply, stand up and state uncomfortable truths about what must be done and what th
Re: (Score:1)
At least you admit to believing in the Stalinist regime. Anyone that does not submit to the government mandates will be beaten and thrown in gulags for hoarding some bananas.
Empires have not fallen due to cronyism. Past democratic societies failed once the citizens learned they could vote themselves unlimited handouts. It's why the US is a Republic and why we have separation of powers. Unfortunately, we're headed that way as one party has learned that it can keep promising all sorts of free stuff in ret
So much for "open" (Score:4, Interesting)
Hurry up and implode and go away, assholes
Re: (Score:3)
Amen!
Show me the money (Score:2)
Sam wants his billions, but Microsoft want theirs too
What a shocker (Score:2, Redundant)
And here, I thought OpenAI was an idealistic company and wasn't just the greedy sugar baby of Microsoft. What a totally unexpected letdown!
Oh well. At least they never had "Don't be evil" in their motto.
Re:What a shocker (Score:4, Interesting)
What I want to know is what state law is it that allows Converting a non-profit into a for-profit.
It is starting to seem like they arere fraudulently organized as a non-profit on the books then.
Those assets are supposed to be owned by the Public, and it is never in the public interest to convert public assets into private for-profit assets.
Re: (Score:2)
They can sell the company as an asset to then use the profits to pursue their charter. They can start OpenAIForRealThisTime with the money.
Though I don't see how handing Altman ~10 Billion fits in there (he will not settle for less).
Re:What a shocker (Score:4, Insightful)
This was my thought also. People that thought they were donating to a common cause for a common good should be p!ssed to see the work they funded become private and their money go into Altman's back pocket.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not what a non-profit is. It has nothing to do with public ownership.
How does this make sense for the non profit? (Score:2)
Everyone damned Musk for negotiating a huge paydeal, now Altman is scamming a non profit out of the same and it's okay?
Going private is pretty sketchy to begin with, but then taking part of that profit to make Altman a billionaire makes little sense.
Profiting of stolen goods (Score:3)
So OpenAI stole basically all its training materials, and because it was a "non-profit" they get a free pass, right?
But if they become a for-profit, can people rally come after them for having their works stolen? I hope so!
Rope-a-dope (Score:2)
Gave money to a non-profit, they took it and went for-profit
Re: (Score:1)
> Gave money to a non-profit, they took it and went for-profit
And who is the stupid one here?
Avoiding taxes until it's convenient (Score:2)
Step 1: Organize as a nonprofit. Build your business tax-free.
Step 2. Gain traction in the marketplace, start making big bucks.
Step 3: Convert to for-profit. Pay off executives and shareholders. Don't bother to pay back taxes.
That's quite a reversal (Score:5, Insightful)
Guess they just wanted money after all.
Re: (Score:3)
> Guess they just wanted money after all.
Have to make money somehow. It's not like Linux where it costs nothing to produce.
Re:That's quite a reversal (Score:4, Insightful)
They ARE making money! This just means that Sam gets to be a billionaire, with billions more coming his way by way of bonuses (whether he generates profit or not, likely). This is Altman being every bit the greedy bro of the ilk that have been ruining the reputation of the tech industry.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong! They are making plenty of money. Sam Altman wanted more money! That's the critical difference.
Re: (Score:2)
You do understand that a non-profit does make money , don't you? It just only needs to make enough money to cover its costs. It does not then add some arbitrary (and usually ever-increasing) amount of net profit on top.
This is a good way to try and stop a rampant profiteering, AKA in recent years, enshittification. It's also a very good statement about what your company stands for - it stands for its products, and by extension the users of those products - not its shareholders.
While fairly easy circumv
Re: (Score:2)
I feel like a lot of people have misunderstandings of what OpenAI has been doing.
Hint: the "open" in their name is a lie.
Re:That's quite a reversal (Score:4, Insightful)
Will they refund the money which they have now fraudulently gained from people who donated because it was always going to remain a non-profit? Or alternatively release the IP that was developed with that money while they were a non-profit?
There really should be laws around this kind of bait and switch.
Re: (Score:2)
> Will they refund the money which they have now fraudulently gained from people who donated because it was always going to remain a non-profit?
Who donated money because of that?
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately thoughts and prayers doesn't doesn't pay the bills.
Re: (Score:2)
A non profit can still make money and pay bills just as effectively as a for profit. They have trouble attracting capital.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need the equivalent of thousands of person-years of income to "pay the bills" either. $4M is roughly a lifetime of income for an average person. $40M is 10 lifetimes. $4B is 1000 lifetimes.
Think about it...
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, they're just switching to a "Fair Source" revenue generation model.
Re: (Score:2)
> Guess they just wanted money after all.
Shouldn't this comment be +5 Funny or +2 No Shit