> Additionally, a structure with the ownership of OpenAI would be put in place. Microsoft would entail a 49 percent stake while other investors would take over the other 49 percent. The remaining 2 percent will reportedly go to OpenAI’s non-profit parent firm.

When OpenAI was funded as a non-profit in 2015, it raised $1 billion from investors that included YC Research. [1] Sam Altman was also the former president of Y Combinator. [2] How did OpenAI move from being funded entirely as a non profit to a for-profit company with less than 2% being owned by the non-profit?

[1] https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/

[2] https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/sam-altman-for-president

One thing that really bothers me is how much of a contradiction "OpenAI" is. There's virtually nothing open about it.

It's "open" relative to all of the research being IP of Google and FB.

They pulled researchers into their own org and out of FAANG which I think was part of the motivation. They pitched it as open to the public, but I'm not sure that's what it was.

I think opinions also changed because of goal alignment and AGI safety ideas becoming better understood.

FAANG engineers usually publish their research in top NLP conferences ran by the ACL, which forces all published papers to have a permissive license and highly incentives people to contribute code along with the paper for reproducibility reasons.

You don't know what you're talking about. OpenAI has done a lot of self publishing/arxiv to avoid getting slammed in peer review by the fact that none of what they have is open source.

How is https://github.com/openai/whisper not open source?