I thought there was a cap to the value OpenAI had to provide to Microsoft, past which they could remove Microsoft’s influence. Like, $100B-$1t. Is this not true?
Then Microsoft still has capped-profit equity. Microsoft has no control, but gets OpenAI’s IP until AGI.
Only until the capped-profit equity is canceled entirely, that being the point of the capped-profit part. So, even assuming that the IP sharing is baked into the equity rather than part of the repayment, it would only include any ‘AGI’ if OA made a relatively small amount of money on the way to AGI. Which the way things are going, is plausible but certainly not guaranteed.
Microsoft has no control, but gets OpenAI’s IP until AGI
That seems like the ability to keep the IP forever, since I see no reason to assume that the release condition will ever be satisfied by making more powerful AI.
I was going to say that’s worse than what I thought was the case, but I’m not actually sure about that. Partly because my thoughts were fuzzy, and partly because if Microsoft had access to OpenAI’s stuff till they were payed $100B, then that may give them ~the same level of AI access. Both seem bad.
Microsoft has no control, but gets OpenAI’s IP until AGI
This could be cashed out a few ways—does it mean “we can’t make decisions about how to utilize core tech in downstream product offerings or verticals, but we take a hefty cut of any such things that openai then ships”? If so, there may be multiple ways of interpreting it (like microsoft could accuse openai of very costly negligence for neglecting a particular vertical or product idea or application, or they couldn’t).
I thought there was a cap to the value OpenAI had to provide to Microsoft, past which they could remove Microsoft’s influence. Like, $100B-$1t. Is this not true?
My impression is:
OpenAI pays most of its profits to Microsoft until it has repaid Microsoft’s investment
Then Microsoft still has capped-profit equity
Microsoft has no control, but gets OpenAI’s IP until AGI
But I’m not sure.
Only until the capped-profit equity is canceled entirely, that being the point of the capped-profit part. So, even assuming that the IP sharing is baked into the equity rather than part of the repayment, it would only include any ‘AGI’ if OA made a relatively small amount of money on the way to AGI. Which the way things are going, is plausible but certainly not guaranteed.
(Based on this, AGI is explicitly excluded from the IP sharing.)
That seems like the ability to keep the IP forever, since I see no reason to assume that the release condition will ever be satisfied by making more powerful AI.
I was going to say that’s worse than what I thought was the case, but I’m not actually sure about that. Partly because my thoughts were fuzzy, and partly because if Microsoft had access to OpenAI’s stuff till they were payed $100B, then that may give them ~the same level of AI access. Both seem bad.
This could be cashed out a few ways—does it mean “we can’t make decisions about how to utilize core tech in downstream product offerings or verticals, but we take a hefty cut of any such things that openai then ships”? If so, there may be multiple ways of interpreting it (like microsoft could accuse openai of very costly negligence for neglecting a particular vertical or product idea or application, or they couldn’t).
I meant Microsoft doesn’t get to tell OpenAI what models to make, but gets copies of whatever models it does make. See WSJ.