Hacker News Reader

Comment by belter | Hacker News Reader

Again the argument: "I am so rich I would not possibly be dishonest for such a small amounts..." ?

Man I would love if one of our minority shareholder angels told us they'll arrange the purchase of $51M worth of product. Imagine having 10 of those.

Probably a great way to increase equity

Not exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying that it doesn't look like he has undue influence over the deal, rather than that he's not trying to make a buck. No claim about his honesty or lack thereof, but it doesn't look like a puppet constructed solely to enrich himself.

How do you know this startup didn't need this deal to survive or advertise itself?

I definitely don't. I just read the article and went "Whoah is he just openly cutting himself a check?" and it does not seem that way. If I were him, I would recuse myself from the whole process due to my investment, but we have no insider knowledge of how it went down. I've really been unhappy with the transition from nonprofit to for-profit subsidiary, so obviously I disagree pretty thoroughly, but fundamentally this deal isn't immediately disqualifying.

I do wonder if this kind of thing was related to his ouster-and-return, but it happened in 2019 so it would need to be a pattern of behavior beyond what we see in the article.

If someone could explain the dishonest part to a simpleton like me it would be sincerely appreciated.

So he has an incentive to do business with a chip maker that he invested in. But that's allowed right? Or is the argument more that it's like insider trading (investing?) because he knew he might announce business with it in the future? Since it's not publicly traded, I don't even know if that's unethical.

He is not the owner of OpenAI so it can be considered harmful to the company if there was a better chip maker or deal available but he chose the one he has a personal take in.

It would be very hard to prove that choosing company A over company B was a knowingly worse choice for OpenAI though.

Never thought diversifying investments would have this advantage but it makes sense now.

You falsely assume that dishonesty has been established.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com