The timing of the executive departures is extremely suspicious. There's clearly a major shift happening here in Altman's favor, and even if he's not getting equity now it seems inevitable at this point.
As others have noted, the wording here is also highly suspect: "no current plans" for a "giant equity stake" gives him at least two different paths to claim he never lied about the situation if and when he gets equity.
I’m reading the sequel to Robert Grave’s classic, I, Claudius. In it, Cæsar Claudius describes the Imperial Senate’s process of proactive prostration.
The Emperor never requests favours. Instead, ambitious Senators must guess his desires and offer them to him, at which point a song and dance is done about his refusing and the Senate insisting and him, reluctantly, accepting the honor.
So did emperors in other countries. They didn’t want to be the new emperors after a successful usurpation. Instead, their followers needed to plead or even force them to accept the throne
> didn’t want to be the new emperors after a successful usurpation. Instead, their followers needed to plead or even force them to accept the throne
Believable in revolution—for every George Washington and Sulla we have dozens of Pinochets and Putins. After that, however, it’s a stupid lie. The emperor wants things and wants it to look like he was forced to accept it. This is the signature of despots, not even monarchs.
In China, it's about showing that the emperors got the throne by god's will, not for any personal desire.
Sure. You’re still talking about getting the throne, not actions thereafter.
When you're saying the investors are demanding it, the board is saying they've discussed it but don't have specific numbers, saying there are no "current plans" is pretty weak tea as a denial. Okay, there's no plan today but you're... actively working on one?
There are concepts of a plan, though.
[flagged]
He does strike me as the kind of guy who would eat Fido in one gulp if he saw any monetary advantage in it.
Indeed, I heard there are plans for a giant equity stake to be awarded to a company called Notsam Naltman, LLC, which would leave nothing left to give to Sam Altman.
How much credibility do you reckon Sam Altman's words have these days?
Basically none. He isn’t known as Scam Altman in the valley for nothing.
Yeah, but he’s good at it, though. That’s the amazing thing. It’s really obvious to everyone what he’s doing, and yet he still manages to pull it off, repeatedly.
Paul Graham said: “Sam is extremely good at becoming powerful.”
Altman is a predator; people respect their power even if they fear their motives. The investor class love guys like him, because he doesn’t let ethics get in the way of seeking power. Same reason they loved Zuckerberg.
I was a bit distracted and read this as Sam Bankman-Fried, the realized it was Sam Altman, then realised there wasn't much light between the two names imho.
> then realised there wasn't much light between the two names imho.
There is after you burn this image into your brain: https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1av88z5/fir...
:-)
hahaha.
ok I'll pay that.
> investors have raised concerns about Altman not having equity in the high-valued artificial intelligence company that he co-founded
I think here lies the interesting point. I’m not gonna try to mindread Sam and guess at what his true intentions are, but the investors’ intentions are clear: align Sam’s incentives with profit. I wish him the best of luck in navigating this.
Sam already has equity in OpenAI though YC.
He went on to tell them that he's only expecting a wee little equity stake that's just a single digit percentage.
There's a rather simple reason why this is believable: as a board member of OpenAI Inc (the non profit), he is a disqualified person under self dealing rules [1][2]. If he actually gave himself a multi-billion dollar stake in the for-profit OpenAI Global LLC, it'd be the biggest self-dealing investigation in the history of nonprofits. The IRS and CA FTB would come down hard and OpenAI & Sam would spend a year+ dealing with the fallout.
[1] https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/private-foundation...
[2] https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/private-foundation...
Isn't this as simple as him just stepping down from the board? He already gutted it and replaced the members with his own supporters, he doesn't actually need to be on it anymore when it stops being useful.
OpenAI needs money. To do that it must promise to incorporate. It cannot incorporate and then raise funds, because that would take time and give the non-profit blocking leverage. So Altman must raise money while giving a promise, no promise, because the company and non-profit are at arms length.
That said, this is a public announcement. There is motivation more than legal for making this a public concern.
Can you explain what you mean? I'm not quite sure I follow.
> OpenAI needs to raise funds and incorporate.
Which OpenAI are we talking about? Non-profit or its for profit subsidiaries? They're all named OpenAI Inc, OpenAI Global LLC, OpenAI LLC, etc. The for-profit is already incorporated (since 2019 [1]), it just needs to be restructured before anyone is willing to put any more money in at crazy 12 figure valuations.
AFAIK that means removing board control from the nonprofit to prevent another fiasco, converting Microsoft's deal to stock to undo the profit share cap thing, and create an employee stock pool to retain talent.
> Because the company and non-profit are at arms length.
I'm not so sure that they are (that said, I don't understand your overall point so this is probably a nitpick). The subsidiary definitely isn't a passive investment as far as UBIT is concerned, and I don't think they can ever be considered arms length if Altman is both CEO of the for-profit and on the board of the non-profit (as far as the corporate veil goes).
> There is motivation more than legal for making this a public concern.
It definitely feels like a trial balloon.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI#2019:_Transition_from_n...
If he does get equity (not options) then he'll have to pay taxes on it at the 409a valuation which is usually lower than market, but would still be crazy high.
Why would he care about mere money when he gets to be the one to merge with the thing, burning like the brightest star?
I am pretty sure this started brewing in the pot when o1 and it's pricing models were conceptualized
I think he deserves every dollar he can get to protect us from robot overlords!
But wait! OpenAI are the robot overlords!
He would have to deny it, even if there were none of the shenanigans surrounding all this.
That's exactly what someone trying to maximize the value of their equity would say.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Kafkatrap#Noun
>A sophistical rhetorical device in which any denial by an accused person serves as evidence of guilt.
This is exactly the type of link someone guilty of aiding and abetting Sam Altman would post.
Aw, you got me.
Liars will lie to advance their position.
>Regarding his potentially attaining an equity stake, Altman said, “There are no current plans here,” the person said.
>OpenAI Chairman Bret Taylor told CNBC in a statement that while the board has talked about the matter, no specific figures are on the table.
>“The board has had discussions about whether it would be beneficial to the company and our mission to have Sam be compensated with equity, but no specific figures have been discussed nor have any decisions been made,” Taylor said.
So, they're definitely talking about it and it's definitely an option. Yes, technically, there might not be a definitive plan, but the intent and want are both there, and at no point has anybody flatly said, "There will be no equity stake".
Given Sam's history, none of what was said by them today means anything at all, and it cannot be trusted. This is just corporate weasel-wording.
A masterclass in the classic rug pull.
He also denied OpenAI will be a for-profit company. Yet, here we are.
When billions of dollars are up for grabs, values, ethics, morality, past promises and everything else in between will be thrown out the window.
For society, the framework should always be that a corporation is inherently evil. It is only a matter of time when that evil presents itself.
When did he say that?
In 2019 his position seemed to be this. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sam-altman-says-openai-still-...
> Altman said OpenAI's long development time-horizon ultimately meant it had no choice but to abandon the nonprofit model if the company intends to survive.
>
> "In spirit, we still view ourselves as working for the world," Altman said. "But I think you have to sort of play the field as it lies. And we just need so much capital to do our work. I think we'll need more capital than any nonprofit has ever raised, probably, and so this was sort of a reflection of reality."
Did he make statements counter to this at a later date?
Have you read their original statements?
> We're a non-profit research company. Our full-time staff of 60 researchers and engineers is dedicated to working towards our mission regardless of the opportunities for selfish gain which arise along the way.
"regardless of the opportunities for selfish gain which arise along the way", they failed really hard on that point. That Sam Altman had already changed course by 2019 doesn't mean he didn't lie at the start.
https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/OpenAI/OpenAI_...
I thought Sam had no equity in OpenAI and this story is claiming there's no plan for him to have a significant stake.
Where is the selfish gain?
You can claim that the story is false and there is a plan for gain but at this stage we have someone saying A and someone saying !A. It's probably a time to look for evidence.
The whole point is that Sam is not going to stick to his statements.
He is working behind the scenes to get a good stake in the company, and he most likely has told them he needs that stake to motivate himself to take the company to the next level.
I am guessing that they have a slew of new tools upcoming and this is Sam cashing out.
I realize that you believe that he will not stick to his statements.
My query is what evidence are you basing this belief upon? I'm prepared to be convinced by evidence. It seems like for so many people to have a strong opinion that he is a serial liar that there should be many cite-able sources where
A) It is undeniable that Sam Altman said that.
B) It is clear that this is false.
and C) this has happened repeatedly.
Too much of this seems to be relying on "Sources familiar with .... claim .... ".
I'm really not trying to advocate for Altman or OpenAI here, I just would like the claims against them to be robust.
https://openai.com/our-structure/
The company started as a non-profit. A pretty damning evidence in itself.
This was in December 2015. Did it take this genius 4 years to figure out that to survive as a company, you need to a for profit entity?
Nah.
I think the strategy was to milk the marketing for all its worth, claiming to be "advancing the world, with no penny in pocket" high minded savior company. And then pivot (an innovative move) into raking in the money.
Did all the investors pour in billions without the understanding that this will become a for profit, and a for profit that will 10x their investments?
There was PR article after PR article about how he originally had no equity/stock in OpenAI.
Hey, he's in competition with his old mate Elon. Clearly this is what he's referencing.
Tesla has made about 34bn in income over the last 3 years, with stormy waters ahead, yet Elon pocketed himself 56bn under the guise of saving humanity, which is a "vibe" OpenAI also needlessly projects.
That doesn't seem right to me, I am seeing $15B net income in 2023 alone. What am I missing.
Hey you're right I updated the figure. It's better, but still ridiculous IMO. But people will justify it how they want.
Valuation isn't income.
Valuation is about $800B, not $15B.
You aren’t missing anything. The comment you’re responding to is wrong and understating net income for some reason. It was indeed $15B last year. Plus the targets set for Elon’s package was based on a number of metrics there were already met, so I don’t know why net income matters.
Pocketed? No he took a zero salary comp package with equity for hitting absurd targets no one thought he could hit. A strong majority of shareholders approved the package then and reapproved it now. He hit the targets so it’s accurate to say he earned it.
Wasn't the argument that a lot of internal folks didn't think the targets were absurd? That's what I read in the court document.
If internal folks really thought the share price would increase by 983%(the pay package target), they would have bought shares with all the money they have, plus sell/pawn everything they have and borrow as much as they could. That didn't happen.
Yes courts make decisions based off hypothetical human behaviour and not documented evidence.
Even the courts get greedy while making decisions.
That’s the claim, but the court document’s tone and language shows this was an ideological decision for the judge rather than a factual determination.
Regardless, shareholders just voted again on that same exact package retroactively and re approved it. This was a clear indication that the market still feels, even in hindsight, that the past targets were deserving of the equity granted. What internal folks thought or the judge’s guess about shareholders being “tricked” doesn’t matter since it is something shareholders (owners of the company) have judged on their own with all the information they have now about past performance. Also, neither Elon nor his brother voted on the measure. So to me all this serves as evidence that enough people think the targets were absurd enough to at least justify the equity.
The cult of Elon is a large reason for Tesla's ridiculous valuation so it makes sense to give him credit.
I just find it hilarious that Tesla's total profit over all these years is still lower than this pay package.
Exactly, and now the shine is gone, along with a timely 56 billion.
[dead]
He's already a billionaire. I don't understand the motivation. I follow a lot of fatFIRE type subreddits and those people are done when they get a few tens of millions and concentrate on quality of life and enjoying their years remaining. It must take an enhanced level of megalomania or God complex to throw away everything (humanity, your reputation) to go for more than 1 billion.
Money is never enough. Not for a homeless person, not for a billionaire.
If it's never enough, then it's pointless to try to accumulate more. You will be in the same situation of not having enough money.
What you say is not true, otherwise nobody would retire early and many people do just that.
However, many billionaires become that rich for being exactly the type of person for whom money is never enough. But we don't need to be like them.
> pointless to try to accumulate more
That is only true if you are constrained by lack of opportunities.
When money is never enough, then every opportunity to make some is going to be used to the full extent.
Except corporations that will pass on 100 million dollar companies, because it’s not enough to move the needle
I'm trying not to be pessimistic, but the level of trust and faith that I have in Sam Altman is very low.
revisit this in a few years
Whenever I see him speak, he is vague and evasive. He either is untrustworthy or just has no idea what’s going on.
I think the only surprise in this is that he isn’t launching a crypto rug pull.
Don’t google that I’m getting a $5B stock grant vibes
Sam Altman seems like a really shady guy. The tech community wont forget. Im sure there is better alternatives to OpenAI already, and new ones coming in the future.
The tech community loves shady people and plain doesn't care. Look at where Musk is today. He's been lying and being an idiot for years. It's not like people didn't know about Altman. Yet, he somehow landed these extremely high paying and powerful jobs with literally no resume.
It’s cronyism.
Revisit in a few years. I am sure he will get something.
Sam didn't put billions in. Others did.
Hey now, he spent at least 15 hours a week telling various groups of people at OpenAI petty lies in between dinners with Saudi Princes and sundry well-heeled, gullible, low-lifes.
That time is worth money!
Cool story bro
So what you are saying is that we need to keep guessing at the scam you are running.
Because there is always a scam
"That was child's play for me"
The new "Dumb **, they trust me".
[dead]
[flagged]