The article makes some statements that feel like conjectures rather than facts. For example “likely many to move to msft” and more significantly “PPUs will be refreshed with MSFT stock and 10mil salaries”.
84% of OpenAI employees have signed a statement that they will leave OpenAI if the board does not resign. The letter they signed states that Microsoft has made an open offer to any OpenAI employee. And Satya is almost certainly not going to spoil this moment with stingy packages. He is, after all, essentially acquiring a company that was valued at $90 billion, for nothing.
EDIT: And to continue my "thinking out loud", MS have no real need to cut ties with OpenAI (yet), who knows OpenAI might just turn out fine after all this, As S.R. Hadden once said: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?
Why would they need a clean room at all? Part of their investment was almost completely unfettered access to OpenAI IP.
It’s been brought up several times in the past but people seem to respond more to the drama that they put forward, rather than factually correct information.
It always appears plausible at its face if you don't know much about the tech, and if you do know the tech, you still need to have inside sources to really know how far off it is. And even once you know the tech and have inside sources to confirm they make stuff up, people are very reluctant to believe it, so it continues its march unimpeded.
Was the majority of openAIs employees threatening to leave the beneficial and good outcome that you were expecting for the company?
It's perfectly rational for me, a stranger who doesn't work at OpenAI, to say that if I worked at OpenAI, I'd be doing it for the "Open" part and wouldn't exactly enjoy the shift to commercialization - which coincidentally, has been widely reported now, and previously, as being an issue for all employees, not just the board.
It's also perfectly reasonable for me, a stranger who doesn't work at OpenAI, to not be able to know that was outweighed by their appreciation of leadership.
I recommend taking things a bit easier, trying to make everyone else use your frame of reference of conversation as a scorable game with binary opinions is a losing battle. Been there. Better to as dang says, come with curiosity, and learn from what you don't expect to hear.
Indeed, and I was curious as to your answer. There were a number of people a couple days ago, who were talking about the mission, and how its a non profit, and that it was important to stay with that mission.
And I was curious to see what those people think now.
You can feel however you want about your previous opinion and your now new one.
But anyway I am glad that I got your answer to the question, which is that it seems like you no longer believe that this thing was beneficial to almost anyone involved, even those who believed in the mission.
the fact that this happen and satya nadella can make move in the WEEKENDS is pretty big deal
> What’s more important to understand is if Microsoft has legal direct access to all the data and code used for pre-training and RL. It is obviously all stored on Azure, but if the new Sam-led internal team can freely access that, they can basically start exactly where they left off without much of a hiccup. If they cannot get it, then we estimate that it could possibly lead to only a 4-6 month delay vs prior.
Does anyone actually know if MSFT has access to OpenAI's training data ? Hard to imagine the human created/curated portion of it being redone in 4-6 months.
I've read there's some limitation in the OpenAI-MSFT agreement of it being limited to "AI" vs "AGI" technology, but no details of how that determination is made. Maybe time for OpenAI to play the AGI card.