7 ms·

> What exactly is the problem here? Is a non-profit expected to exclusively help impoverished communities or something? Yes. Yes and more yes. That is why, at

> What exactly is the problem here? Is a non-profit expected to exclusively help impoverished communities or something? Yes. Yes and more yes. That is why, at least in the U.S., we have given non-profits exemptions from taxation. Because they are supposed to be improving society, not profiting from it.

arrosenberg 3y ago
> That is why, at least in the U.S., we have given non-profits exemptions from taxation. That's your belief. The NFL, Heritage Foundation and Scientology are all non-profits and none of them improve society; they all profit from it. (For what its' worth, I wish the law was more aligned with your worldview)
- aurareturn 3y ago
  FYI, the NFL teams are for profits and pay taxes like normal busineses. The overwhelming majority of the revenue goes to the teams.
  - arrosenberg 3y ago
    I know that, does that change what I said?
    - aurareturn 3y ago
      I don't know if it does but my point is to prevent others from thinking that a giant money making entity like the NFL does not pay any taxes.
      - hluska 3y ago
        [flagged]
        johncampbelljr 3y ago
        Would you not object if someone characterized google as a non-profit because part of the org (the Google foundation) is non-profit? (Not a perfect analogy (nothing ever is, really).)
- twelvechairs 3y ago
  > OpenAIs goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. OpenAI believes that artificial intelligence technology has the potential to have a profound, positive impact on the world, so the companys goal is to develop and responsibly deploy safe AI technology, ensuring that its benefits are as widely and evenly distributed as possible. From their filing as a non-profit https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/810861541/202243199349314989/full https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/810...
- gardenhedge 3y ago
  An argument could be made that sports - and a sports organization - helps society
  - quickthrower2 3y ago
    As does a peer to peer taxi company.
  - passion__desire 3y ago
    Fast fashion and fashion industry in general is useless to society. But rich jobless people need a place to hangout so they create an activity to justify.
    - achenet 3y ago
      useless to society... fashion allows people to optimize their appearance so as to get more positive attention from others. Or, put more crudely, it helps people look good so they can get laid. Not sure that it's net positive for society as a whole, but individual humans certainly benefit from the fashion industry. Ask anyone who has ever received a compliment on their outfit. This is true for rich people as well as not so rich people - having spent some time working as a salesman at H&M, I can tell you that lower income members of society (like, for example, H&M employees making minimum wage) are very happy to spend a fair percentage of their income on clothing.
      - dheavy 3y ago
        It goes even deeper than getting laid if you study Costume History and its psychological importance. It is a powerful medium of self-expression and social identity yes, deeply rooted in human history where costumes and attire have always signified cultural, social, and economic status. Drawing from tribal psychology, it fulfills an innate human desire for belonging and individuality, enabling people to communicate their affiliation, status, and personal values through their choice of clothing. It has always been and will always be part of humanity, even if its industrialization in Capitalistic societies like ours have hidden this fact. OP's POV is just a bit narrow, that's all.
- tsimionescu 3y ago
  Ostensibly, all three of your examples do exist to improve society. The NFL exists to support a widely popular sport, the Heritage Foundation is there to propose changes that they theoretically believe are better for society, and Scientology is a religion that will save us all from our bad thetans or whatever cockamamie story they sell. A non-profit has to have the intention of improving society. Whether their chosen means is (1) effective and (2) truthful are separate discussions. But an entity can actually lose non-profit status if it is found to be operated for the sole benefit of its higher ups, and is untruthful in its mission. It is typically very hard to prove though, just like it's very hard to successfully sue a for-profit CEO/president for breach of fiduciary duty.
  - lordnacho 3y ago
    I think GP deals with that in his parenthesis. It would be nice if we held organizations to their stated missions. We don't. Perhaps there simply shouldn't be a tax break. After all if your org spends all its income on charity, it won't pay any tax anyway. If it sells cookies for more than what it costs to make and distribute them, why does it matter whether it was for a charity? Plus, we already believe that for-profit orgs can benefit society, in fact part of the reason for creating them as legal entities is that we think there's some sort of benefit, whether it be feeding us or creating toys. So why have a special charity sector?
- mschuster91 3y ago
  > The NFL, Heritage Foundation and Scientology are all non-profits and none of them improve society; they all profit from it. At least for Scientology, the government actually tried to pull the rug, but it didn't work out because they managed to achieve the unthinkable - they successfully extorted the US government to keep their tax-exempt status.
- some1else 3y ago
  Starting OpenAI as a fork of Scientology from the get go would have saved everyone a great deal of hair splitting.
  - polygamous_bat 3y ago
    :s/Xenu/AGI/g
- whelp_24 3y ago
  The NFL also is a non-profit in charge of for-profits. Except they never pretended to be a charity, just an event organizer.
- depr 3y ago
  So what is your belief about why they exist?
- mensetmanusman 3y ago
  it's also your belief that sports like the nfl do not improve society ... beliefs can't be proven or disproven, they are axioms.
- ameister14 3y ago
  No - that's the reasoning behind the law. You appear to be struggling with the idea that the law as enacted does not accomplish the goal it was created to accomplish and are working backwards to say that because it is not accomplishing this goal that couldn't have been why it was enacted. Non-profits are supposed to benefit their community. Could the law be better? Sure, but that doesn't change the purpose behind it.
- turquoisevar 3y ago
  Bad actors exploiting good things isn’t in and of itself an indictment of said good things.
todd3834 3y ago
I don’t think OpenAI ever reported to be profitable. They are allowed and should make money so they can stay alive. ChatGPT has already had a tremendous positive impact on society. The cause of safe AGI is going to take a lot of money in more research.
- shafyy 3y ago
  > ChatGPT has already had a tremendous positive impact on society. Citation needed
  - todd3834 3y ago
    Fair enough, I should have said, it’s my opinion that it has had a positive impact. I still think it’s easy to see them as a non profit. Even with everything they announced at AI day. Can anyone make an argument against it? Or just downvote because you don’t agree.
    - sgt101 3y ago
      I think ChatGPT has created some harms: - It's been used unethically for psychological and medical purposes (with insufficient testing and insufficient consent, and possible psychological and physical harms). - It has been used to distort educational attainment and undermine the current basis of some credentials as a result. - It has been used to create synthetic content that has been released unmarked into the internet distorting and biasing future models trained on that content. - It has been used to support criminal activity (scams). - It has been used to create propaganda & fake news. - It has devalued and replaced the work of people who relied on that work for their incomes.
      - vbo 3y ago
        and so has the internet. some use it for good, others for evil. these are behaviours and traits of the user, not the tool.
        3y ago

arrosenberg 3y ago

> That is why, at least in the U.S., we have given non-profits exemptions from taxation. That's your belief. The NFL, Heritage Foundation and Scientology are all non-profits and none of them improve society; they all profit from it. (For what its' worth, I wish the law was more aligned with your worldview)

aurareturn 3y ago
FYI, the NFL teams are for profits and pay taxes like normal busineses. The overwhelming majority of the revenue goes to the teams.
- arrosenberg 3y ago
  I know that, does that change what I said?
  - aurareturn 3y ago
    I don't know if it does but my point is to prevent others from thinking that a giant money making entity like the NFL does not pay any taxes.
    - hluska 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - johncampbelljr 3y ago
        Would you not object if someone characterized google as a non-profit because part of the org (the Google foundation) is non-profit? (Not a perfect analogy (nothing ever is, really).)
twelvechairs 3y ago
> OpenAIs goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. OpenAI believes that artificial intelligence technology has the potential to have a profound, positive impact on the world, so the companys goal is to develop and responsibly deploy safe AI technology, ensuring that its benefits are as widely and evenly distributed as possible. From their filing as a non-profit https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/810861541/202243199349314989/full https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/810...
gardenhedge 3y ago
An argument could be made that sports - and a sports organization - helps society
- quickthrower2 3y ago
  As does a peer to peer taxi company.
- passion__desire 3y ago
  Fast fashion and fashion industry in general is useless to society. But rich jobless people need a place to hangout so they create an activity to justify.
  - achenet 3y ago
    useless to society... fashion allows people to optimize their appearance so as to get more positive attention from others. Or, put more crudely, it helps people look good so they can get laid. Not sure that it's net positive for society as a whole, but individual humans certainly benefit from the fashion industry. Ask anyone who has ever received a compliment on their outfit. This is true for rich people as well as not so rich people - having spent some time working as a salesman at H&M, I can tell you that lower income members of society (like, for example, H&M employees making minimum wage) are very happy to spend a fair percentage of their income on clothing.
    - dheavy 3y ago
      It goes even deeper than getting laid if you study Costume History and its psychological importance. It is a powerful medium of self-expression and social identity yes, deeply rooted in human history where costumes and attire have always signified cultural, social, and economic status. Drawing from tribal psychology, it fulfills an innate human desire for belonging and individuality, enabling people to communicate their affiliation, status, and personal values through their choice of clothing. It has always been and will always be part of humanity, even if its industrialization in Capitalistic societies like ours have hidden this fact. OP's POV is just a bit narrow, that's all.
tsimionescu 3y ago
Ostensibly, all three of your examples do exist to improve society. The NFL exists to support a widely popular sport, the Heritage Foundation is there to propose changes that they theoretically believe are better for society, and Scientology is a religion that will save us all from our bad thetans or whatever cockamamie story they sell. A non-profit has to have the intention of improving society. Whether their chosen means is (1) effective and (2) truthful are separate discussions. But an entity can actually lose non-profit status if it is found to be operated for the sole benefit of its higher ups, and is untruthful in its mission. It is typically very hard to prove though, just like it's very hard to successfully sue a for-profit CEO/president for breach of fiduciary duty.
- lordnacho 3y ago
  I think GP deals with that in his parenthesis. It would be nice if we held organizations to their stated missions. We don't. Perhaps there simply shouldn't be a tax break. After all if your org spends all its income on charity, it won't pay any tax anyway. If it sells cookies for more than what it costs to make and distribute them, why does it matter whether it was for a charity? Plus, we already believe that for-profit orgs can benefit society, in fact part of the reason for creating them as legal entities is that we think there's some sort of benefit, whether it be feeding us or creating toys. So why have a special charity sector?
mschuster91 3y ago
> The NFL, Heritage Foundation and Scientology are all non-profits and none of them improve society; they all profit from it. At least for Scientology, the government actually tried to pull the rug, but it didn't work out because they managed to achieve the unthinkable - they successfully extorted the US government to keep their tax-exempt status.
some1else 3y ago
Starting OpenAI as a fork of Scientology from the get go would have saved everyone a great deal of hair splitting.
- polygamous_bat 3y ago
  :s/Xenu/AGI/g
whelp_24 3y ago
The NFL also is a non-profit in charge of for-profits. Except they never pretended to be a charity, just an event organizer.
depr 3y ago
So what is your belief about why they exist?
mensetmanusman 3y ago
it's also your belief that sports like the nfl do not improve society ... beliefs can't be proven or disproven, they are axioms.
ameister14 3y ago
No - that's the reasoning behind the law. You appear to be struggling with the idea that the law as enacted does not accomplish the goal it was created to accomplish and are working backwards to say that because it is not accomplishing this goal that couldn't have been why it was enacted. Non-profits are supposed to benefit their community. Could the law be better? Sure, but that doesn't change the purpose behind it.
turquoisevar 3y ago
Bad actors exploiting good things isn’t in and of itself an indictment of said good things.

todd3834 3y ago

I don’t think OpenAI ever reported to be profitable. They are allowed and should make money so they can stay alive. ChatGPT has already had a tremendous positive impact on society. The cause of safe AGI is going to take a lot of money in more research.

shafyy 3y ago
> ChatGPT has already had a tremendous positive impact on society. Citation needed
- todd3834 3y ago
  Fair enough, I should have said, it’s my opinion that it has had a positive impact. I still think it’s easy to see them as a non profit. Even with everything they announced at AI day. Can anyone make an argument against it? Or just downvote because you don’t agree.
  - sgt101 3y ago
    I think ChatGPT has created some harms: - It's been used unethically for psychological and medical purposes (with insufficient testing and insufficient consent, and possible psychological and physical harms). - It has been used to distort educational attainment and undermine the current basis of some credentials as a result. - It has been used to create synthetic content that has been released unmarked into the internet distorting and biasing future models trained on that content. - It has been used to support criminal activity (scams). - It has been used to create propaganda & fake news. - It has devalued and replaced the work of people who relied on that work for their incomes.
    - vbo 3y ago
      and so has the internet. some use it for good, others for evil. these are behaviours and traits of the user, not the tool.
      - 3y ago