undefined | Better HN

0 pointss1artibartfast2y ago0 comments

See my other response. If you have people sign a contract that says the mission comes first, but also give them profit sharing stocks, and cap those profits at 1.1 Trillion, it is bound to cause some conflicts of interest in reality, even if it is clear who calls the shots when deciding how to balance the mission and profit

0 comments

cthalupa2y ago

There might be some conflict of interest but the resolution to those conflicts is clear: The mission comes first.

OpenAI employees might not like it and it might drive them to leave, but they entered into this agreement with a full understanding that the structure has always been in place to prioritize the non-profit's charter.

ffgjgf12y ago

> The mission comes first.

Which might only be possible with future funding? From Microsoft in this case. And in any case if they give out any more shares in the wouldn’t they (with MS) be able to just take over the for-profit corp?

s1artibartfastOP2y ago

The deal with Microsoft was 11 billion for 49% of the venture. First off, if open AI can't get it done with 11 billion plus whatever Revenue, they probably won't. Second, the way the for-profit is set up, it may not matter how much Microsoft owns, because the nonprofit keeps 100% of the control. Seems like that's the deal that Microsoft signed. They bought a share of profits with no control. Third, my understanding is that the 11 billion from Microsoft is based on milestones. If openai doesn't meet them, they don't get all the money

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse