Just a moment...
apnews.com

OpenAI’s history as a nonprofit research institute that also sells commercial products like ChatGPT may be coming to an end as the San Francisco company looks to more fully convert itself into a for-profit corporation accountable to shareholders.

The company’s board is considering a decision that would change the company into a public benefit corporation, according to a source familiar with the discussions who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly about them.

While OpenAI already has a for-profit division, where most of its staff works, it is controlled by a nonprofit board of directors whose mission is to help humanity. That would change if the company converts the core of its structure to a public benefit corporation, which is a type of corporate entity that is supposed to help society as well as turn a profit.

  • BertramDitore@lemm.eeEnglish
    107·
    2 months ago

    This was so predictable. It seems they only care about profits now, and also positioning themselves to be a monopoly, so they really haven’t been compatible with the non-profit model for a while. Especially since they just raised more than $6 billion.

    It’s truly amazing to me that a “non-profit” that has disingenuously represented itself from day one, and is based almost entirely on the theft of intellectual property that would get normal individuals prosecuted out the ass, can continue to rake in absurd amounts of cash. I really dislike this company.

      • BertramDitore@lemm.eeEnglish
        3·
        2 months ago

        I would tend to agree. I feel the same way about Amazon Logistics. The whole packaging and delivery side of Amazon should be brought under the USPS so every driver gets a fair wage and job protections. USPS already delivers so much of their stuff anyway, and Amazon shouldn’t be in control of the marketplace and the whole shipping process and infrastructure.

        OpenAI is relying on all of human knowledge to build their product, regardless of whether or not it falls under copyright protection, so while the government doesn’t need more power, it’s still probably the best positioned to regulate this stuff, and that’d be much easier if they had direct control.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        1·
        2 months ago

        Yea his “funny story” about carrying around a briefcase to explode his data center is just an asshat wanting to play James Bond.

    • futatorius@lemm.eeEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      “Open” could also mean open publication of papers, open standards for APIs, or (most likely) Altman’s grabby hand always being open for for money.

    • futatorius@lemm.eeEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      “Open” doesn’t imply “non-profit.” In fact, it doesn’t imply much of anything In that way it’s like “Active” or “Direct” which are or were used as parts of a number of Microsoft product names.

  • Beemo Dachboden@feddit.orgDeutsch
    18·
    2 months ago

    How can it be a thing to just make a non profit organization into a for profit organization?

    I thought non profits have benefits when it comes to taxation and regulations.
    Why can it be allowed that the new for profit organization can just reap the rewards from those benefits that it used to grow into what it is now?

    That seems to me like it should be plainly illegal.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        1·
        2 months ago

        That’s how it should work but not how it works.

        It’s more like an open-source project going closed-source. They can do that at any time.

  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
    17·
    2 months ago

    Shocking. Absolutely shocking, I say. It’s almost like we’ve seen this exact pattern a hundred times before.

  • monotremata@lemmy.caEnglish
    16·
    2 months ago

    Capitalism is already a superintelligence, and its goals are misaligned with those of humanity.

      • futatorius@lemm.eeEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        Open source products, back in the day, competed against the giant corporations of their time, which spent vast sums on R&D, and yet succeeded. That’s because massive organizations lack agility, suck at innovation and fail to inspire people with real talent. They might make a few prestige hires here and there, but who wants to work for Microsoft or for a greedhead VC tech bro, even if it means a big payday? And there are more ethical organizations around that are not controlled by Altman or other greedhead tech bros like Zuckerberg.

  • Vivendi@lemmy.zip
    12·
    2 months ago

    PSA: There is a super easy to use app called “GPT4ALL” which lets literally any idiot run an open source LLM on their local machine. (As long as you don’t go fucking crazy and try to run a huuuuge model, that is)

    Smaller models run at pretty good speeds on my RX 5700 XT. Yes, you heard that right, you can use Vulkan to run them on an AMD GPU

  • stoly@lemmy.world
    9·
    2 months ago

    I was looking for a job in the San Fran area by keyword for a product I am a near expert on. I happened to find a listing for a position that I was qualified for at OpenAI. The post was truly creepy and had a weird fascist smear all over it where they were writing in all caps, multiple times that there would be no work from home or even hybrid work. It was unnecessary and very strange. I ran away and never looked back. Nothing of this surprises me.