Crossposted from: https://hexbear.net/post/8036692
I promise we’re good for it guys!
I’m absolutely amazed that Altman isn’t considered toxic waste by now financially. He was declared untrustworthy by his own board, and as far as I’m aware OpenAI has fallen short of every known business agreement so far. They have so many deals contingent on shit they haven’t delivered and can’t deliver that it should make any risk analyst’s head spin.
The subtext sounds like “we guarantee your returns, then go public. If we go bankrupt you get the retail investors’ money, if we become the next Google you get your own private island.” All you have to do is trust Sam Altman and (breaks out in hysterical laughter).
Do they mean 17.5% a year? My balanced bond-equity portfolio made 14-15% annual returns over the past three years by the radical method of buying “shares of companies that make profits” and “bonds backed by my local and national government.” (Update: I made about 12% a year because I backed out of American stocks years ago, but the blandest 60% stock, 40% bond index fund in my country returned that 14-15% a year after expenses).
That’s OpenAI out then
@CinnasVerses @techtakes
This kind of ROI to me stinks of late-stages Ponzi scheme—the smart money has made its pile, but they need to keep pulling in the rubes to keep the illusion of growth running.
Yes, promising “returns like a good year on the stock market, but no risk” usually says Ponzi.
When the forensic accountants go through OpenAI’s books in 2027 or 2028 I would like to see whether anyone but staff and suppliers made money from it.