Theft of what, and from whom? The author breathlessly jumps around without ever establishing the most basic premise. Seems like clickbait doom-mongering more than anything substantial.
Theft of what, and from whom? The author breathlessly jumps around without ever establishing the most basic premise. Seems like clickbait doom-mongering more than anything substantial.
Here’s an analogy that might help:
Imagine if an executive was running the world’s largest charity for cancer research, which was chartered to make sure a cure remained in the public trust and raised millions with that promise.
But then once they discovered a cure for cancer the executive instead decided to transfer that cure to a ruthlessly competitive company they personally owned a large percentage of and then become a billionaire many times over.
I thought Altman didn't own hardly any equity.
Bloomberg reported last year that Sam is angling for the board to give him 7% of the company, and the board was seriously discussing it. The optics weren’t right at the time, but you can rely on something being in planning.
Sam doesn’t do anything for free, even though he is already a billionaire 2-3 times over.
He doesn't, which the Sam haters consistently just ignore or gloss over. Or my favorite, they pivot to complaining about how OpenAI is investing in companies he has a stake in, so that's how he's grifting everyone! Which makes no sense, because he could have pretty easily openly negotiated tens of billions in equity in OpenAI if he was after that, rather than try and do some kind of sleight of hand behind the scenes to maybe make 1% of that. Maybe.
Altman isn’t the only beneficiary, my analogy is just that, an analogy.
The property of a charity is being pillaged for the benefit of private parties, like Microsoft, existing employees, and yes of course Altman himself via various means.
You can “well actually” this all day, but at the beginning of the story there’s a charity with millions of dollars to do research and the promise to keep the resulting advancements in the public trust.
At the end of the story there will be billions of dollars in the hands of private individuals and the IP the charity created in the hands of a ruthless for profit company.
What's in it for Altman then? It's money but how?