6 ms·
The key line: “Microsoft has assured us that there are positions for all OpenAl employees at this new subsidiary should we choose to join.”
by mjirv 3y ago
The key line:
“Microsoft has assured us that there are positions for all OpenAl employees at this new subsidiary should we choose to join.”
- sebzim4500 3y agoI think everyone assumed this was an aquihire without the "aqui-" but this is the first time I've seen it explicitly stated.
- nextworddev 3y agowill they stay though? what happens to their OAI options?
- teeray 3y agoWill their OAI options be worth anything if the implosion continues?
- nextworddev 3y agoyeah but threatening to quit is actually accelerating the implosion
- ilikehurdles 3y agoI don’t believe startups can have successful exits without extraordinary leadership (which the current board can never find). The people quitting are simply jumping off a sinking ship.
- almost_usual 3y agoMSFT RSUs actually have value as opposed to OpenAI’s Profit Participation Units (PPU). https://www.levels.fyi/blog/openai-compensation.html https://www.levels.fyi/blog/openai-compensation.html https://images.openai.com/blob/142770fb-3df2-45d9-9ee3-7aa069acada1/image1.png https://images.openai.com/blob/142770fb-3df2-45d9-9ee3-7aa06...
- baby_souffle 3y agoWhat will happen to their newly granted msft shares? One can be sold _today_ and might be worth a lot more soon…
- catchnear4321 3y agohostile takeunder?
- rvz 3y agoSo essentially, OpenAI is a sinking ship as long as the board members go ahead with their new CEO and Sam, Greg are not returning. Microsoft can absorb all the employees and switch them into the new AI subsidiary which basically is an acqui-hire without buying out everyone else's shares and making a new DeepMind / OpenAI research division inside of the company. So all along it was a long winded side-step into having a new AI division without all the regulatory headaches of a formal acquisition.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> OpenAI is a sinking ship as long as the board members go ahead with their new CEO and Sam, Greg are not returning Far from certain. One, they still control a lot of money and cloud credits. Two, they can credibly threaten to license to a competitor or even open source everything, thereby destroying the unique value of the work. > without all the regulatory headaches of a formal acquisition This, too, is far from certain.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- s1artibartfast 3y ago>Far from certain. One, they still control a lot of money and cloud credits. This too is far from certain. The funding and credits was at best tied to milestones, and at worst, the investment contract is already broken and msft can walk. I suspect they would not actually do the latter and the ip is tied to continual partnership.
- jacquesm 3y agoAnd sue for the assets of OpenAI on account of the damage the board did to their stock... and end up with all of the IP.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 3y ago
- bertil 3y agoThat is a spectacular power move: extending 700 job offers, many of which would be close to $1 million per year compensation.
- layer8 3y agoThey didn’t say anything about the compensation.
- nottheengineer 3y agoSounds a lot like MS wants to have OpenAI but without a boards that considers pesky things like morals.
- Fluorescence 3y agoTime for a counter-counter-coup that ends up with Microsoft under the Linux Foundation after RMS reveals he is Satoshi...
- Justsignedup 3y agoRMS (I assume Richard Stallman) may be many many many things, but setting up a global pyramid scheme doesn't seem to be his M.O. But stranger things have happened. One day I may be very very VERY surprised.
- fsflover 3y agoThere is nothing related to pyramids in bitcoin. It's just an implementation of a novel, trustless electronic money, also it's free software.
- Justsignedup 3y agohow would you define an asset that has zero intrinsic value other than the value people have already committed to it? house of cards?
- fsflover 3y agoMoney.
- Justsignedup 3y agobut money has intrinsic value. It is directly tied to the economy of a country. So if a country was to collapse, so would it's money. The point here is that if a country collapses, then you got bigger problems than the loss of whatever stored currency you got. Even if your money is in the hypothetically useful crypto, you got far bigger problems that the money you own is useless to you, you need to survive. But aside from that extreme scenario, money is not the same thing. Another way to think of it: There is nothing in the world that would prevent the immediate collapse of crypto if everyone who owns it just decided to sell. If everyone in the world stops accepting the US Dollar, the US can still continue to use it internally and manufacture goods and such. It'll just be a collapse of trade, but then even in that scenario people can just exchange the dollar locally for say gold, and trade gold on the global market. So the dollar has physical and usable backing. Meanwhile crypto has literally nothing.