• D.C.
  • BXL
  • Lagos
  • Dubai
  • Beijing
  • SG
rotating globe
  • D.C.
  • BXL
  • Lagos
Semafor Logo
  • Dubai
  • Beijing
  • SG


In today’s edition, an exclusive look at the rift between two tech titans that shaped who would lead͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌  ͏‌ 
 
cloudy San Francisco
thunderstorms Washington, D.C.
cloudy Beijing
rotating globe
March 24, 2023
semafor

Technology

Technology
Sign up for our free newsletters
 
Reed Albergotti
Reed Albergotti

Hi, and welcome to Semafor Tech, a twice-weekly newsletter from Louise Matsakis and me that gives an inside look at the struggle for the future of the tech industry.

I was reading Elon Musk’s tweets that criticized OpenAI for starting out as a nonprofit in 2015 and then becoming a for profit in 2019. That got me thinking, and then reporting. I learned there’s more to the story, though it wasn’t easy to get. The tech industry can be a secretive place and many are afraid of the wrath of @elonmusk.

It turns out there’s a fascinating backstory to OpenAI, which Musk helped create. In 2018, he believed it was losing the AI race to Google and wanted to take it over. That didn’t happen, and he walked, cutting off his financial support. While he criticizes OpenAI for becoming a business, it turns out Musk helped spur that decision in the first place when he reneged on his pledge to fund it. And here’s something to ponder:  In an alternate reality, Musk could have ended up running OpenAI, and who knows what would have happened.

Read below for the previously untold story of the tech luminaries now fighting over the hottest company in their industry. And Louise shares a text exchange on the curious subtleties of Thursday’s TikTok hearing while Apple is increasingly dominating the handset market. And an elusive geometry puzzle solved … and not by AI.

Move Fast/Break Things

Unsplash/Alexander Shatov

➚ MOVE FAST: Parental control. Utah passed a draconian social media law requiring minors to get permission from their parents before opening a social media account, among other restrictions. The new rules will make plenty of parents happy and could be taken up by other statehouses, but will also be keeping privacy advocates up at night.

➘ BREAK THINGS: Mission control. A rocket launched by the company Relativity Space failed to reach orbit earlier this week. Terran 1 is unique in that it’s powered by liquid methane and 3D-printed engines, and it remains an awe-inspiring piece of technology. Relativity Space says it plans to release more details about what went wrong in the coming days.

PostEmail
Semafor Stat

The number of days that Korean crypto fugitive Do Kwon was on the run after Interpol issued a “red notice” for his arrest in September. Montenegro authorities announced Thursday they had finally nabbed the Terra Labs co-founder, who was caught using fraudulent Costa Rican travel documents while trying to board a flight to Dubai. Kwon’s company imploded last year after the price of its stablecoin, TerraUSD, and a sister token called Luna collapsed.

PostEmail
Reed Albergotti

The secret history of Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and OpenAI

Semafor/Al Lucca

THE SCOOP

After three years, Elon Musk was ready to give up on the artificial intelligence research firm he helped found, OpenAI.

The nonprofit had launched in 2015 to great fanfare with backing from billionaire tech luminaries like Musk and Reid Hoffman, who had as a group pledged $1 billion. It had lured some of the top minds in the field to leave big tech companies and academia.

But in early 2018, Musk told Sam Altman, another OpenAI founder, that he believed the venture had fallen fatally behind Google, people familiar with the matter said.

And Musk proposed a possible solution: He would take control of OpenAI and run it himself.

Altman and OpenAI’s other founders rejected Musk’s proposal. Musk, in turn, walked away from the company — and reneged on a massive planned donation. The fallout from that conflict, culminating in the announcement of Musk’s departure on Feb 20, 2018, would shape the industry that’s changing the world, and the company at the heart of it.

The conflict would also create a public rift between the two most important players in technology today, Musk and Altman. Semafor spoke to eight people familiar with the inside story, and is revealing the details here for the first time.

KNOW MORE

But in 2018, there was no reason to think that either the impulsive Musk or quirky, quiet Altman would become so central to the Silicon Valley narrative, even if they were already among its most prominent names. Musk, for one, had other headaches. Tesla was struggling to keep up with production goals of its Model 3 sedan and the stock was tanking, threatening the company’s future.

Greg Brockman, a co-founder who was chief technology officer at that time, also opposed Musk’s takeover as did others at OpenAI. A power struggle ensued, according to people familiar with the matter.

Altman, who also ran the powerful startup accelerator YCombinator, stepped in. According to tax documents, he added president to his title in 2018, in addition to being a director.

Musk then stepped down from OpenAI’s board of directors. Publicly, he and OpenAI said the reason for his departure was a conflict of interest. Tesla, which was developing its own artificial intelligence for autonomous driving, would be competing for talent with OpenAI.

There was some truth to that rivalry. Tesla had already poached one of OpenAI’s best minds, Andrej Karpathy, who became the architect of Tesla’s autonomous driving program.

But few people at OpenAI believed Musk was leaving for that reason, and a speech he gave at OpenAI’s offices at the time of his departure, which focused mainly on the potential conflict of interest, was not received well by most employees, who didn’t entirely buy the story.

An OpenAI announcement said Musk would continue to fund the organization, but Musk did not, according to people familiar with the matter. He had promised to donate roughly $1 billion over a period of years (he had already contributed $100 million), but his payments stopped after his departure, people familiar with the matter said. That left the nonprofit with no ability to pay the astronomical fees associated with training AI models on supercomputers.

Elon Musk
Reuters/NTB/Carina Johansen

That fall, it became even more apparent to some people at OpenAI that the costs of becoming a cutting edge AI company were going to go up. Google Brain’s “transformer” had blown open a new frontier, where AI could improve endlessly. But that meant feeding it endless data to train it — a costly endeavor.

OpenAI made a big decision to pivot toward these transformer models.

On March 11, 2019, OpenAI announced it was creating a for profit entity so that it could raise enough money to pay for the compute power necessary to pursue the most ambitious AI models. “We want to increase our ability to raise capital while still serving our mission, and no pre-existing legal structure we know of strikes the right balance,” the company wrote at the time. OpenAI said it was capping profits for investors, with any excess going to the original nonprofit.

Altman also made an unusual decision for a tech boss: He would take no equity in the new for-profit entity, according to people familiar with the matter. Altman was already extremely wealthy, investing in several wildly successful tech startups, and didn’t need the money.

He also believed the company needed to become a business to continue its work, but he told people the project was not designed to make money. Eschewing any ownership interest would help him stay aligned with the original mission.  But that decision actually turned off some potential investors in OpenAI, who worried that Altman didn’t see upside in the project.

Less than six months later, OpenAI took $1 billion from Microsoft, which could provide not just funding but infrastructure know-how. Together they built a supercomputer to train massive models that eventually created ChatGPT and the image generator DALL-E. The latest language model, GPT-4, has 1 trillion parameters.

When ChatGPT launched in November, OpenAI instantly became the hottest new tech startup, forcing Google to scramble to play catchup. Musk was furious, according to people familiar with the matter.

In December, a month after the launch of ChatGPT, Musk pulled OpenAI’s access to the Twitter “fire hose” of data — a contract that was signed before Musk acquired Twitter.

On Feb. 17, he tweeted “OpenAI was created as an open source (which is why I named it “Open” AI), non-profit company to serve as a counterweight to Google, but now it has become a closed source, maximum-profit company effectively controlled by Microsoft.”

On March 15, he tweeted, “I’m still confused as to how a non-profit to which I donated ~$100M somehow became a $30B market cap for-profit. If this is legal, why doesn’t everyone do it?”

OpenAI declined to comment. Musk didn’t respond to a request for comment but on Friday, he tweeted “I’m sure it will be fine” and a meme of Elmo with the words: “Me realizing AI, the most powerful tool that mankind has ever created, is now in the hands of a ruthless corporate monopoly.”

On Thursday, The Information reported that Shivon Zillis, an OpenAI board member, had stepped down. Zillis, who gave birth to Musk’s twins, did not respond to requests for comment.

REED’S VIEW

The dispute between Musk and OpenAI has little to do with its status as a for-profit entity. Instead, OpenAI has put Google on its heels and Musk has nothing to do with the hottest thing in tech. Knowing that he played a crucial role in its founding, and chose to walk away, can only sting more.

Musk now aims to launch his own AI startup. But he’ll be coming from behind and saddled with the costly distraction that is Twitter. (Not to mention Tesla and SpaceX).

Most founder disputes revolve around money and credit for an idea. For Musk, who is at times the world’s richest person, it seems it’s more about ego, power and, I believe, his genuine desire to safely usher in the era of artificial intelligence. (He may believe he’s the only person who can do it.)

For Altman, it’s not about money, either.  One of the most surprising things in all of this is that he does not own even a tiny piece of OpenAI, which highlights the unusual nature of this company and the entire AI industry.

It’s personal for him too, because his new role as CEO of OpenAI is a comeback story.

“I failed pretty hard at my first startup--it sucked!--and am doing pretty well on my second,” he tweeted last month.. “The thing i wish someone told me during the first one is that no one else thinks about your failures as much as you do, and that as long as don’t psych yourself out you can try again.”

Altman won’t make any money on his new startup, but he’s earned himself a place in history.

NOTABLE

  • OpenAI has changed a lot over the years and this piece in MIT Technology Review — which got special access to the company — explores whether it is staying true to its mission.
  • Sam Altman was profiled in depth in this 2016 New Yorker article, which offers some good insight into the company’s early days.
  • Come for the fateful dinner at the Rosewood Hotel where OpenAI was first dreamed up, stay for the Napa Valley courtship, described in this Wired article where nine out of ten AI whizzes agree to become founding researchers at OpenAI.
PostEmail
Evidence

Android is still the dominant operating system around the world, but data shows a greater share of consumers are now instead choosing to use Apple’s premium iOS devices. That’s the case even in places like South Korea, home to smartphone giant Samsung, where 52% of people ages 18-29 said last year they used iPhones, up from 44% two years earlier.

PostEmail
Watchdogs

TikTok CEO Shou Chew
Reuters/Evelyn Hockstein

TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew’s first appearance before Congress on Thursday was hard to watch. For roughly five hours, House lawmakers grilled Chew about everything from racist content on the app to the number of Spanish-language moderators it employs, often giving him little or no time to actually respond to their queries. Like so many of these tech hearings, it was an exercise more in spectacle than about getting to the bottom of what to do about TikTok and the threat lawmakers believe its Chinese ownership poses to national security.

One of the most important takeaways, though, is that lawmakers are clearly not satisfied by Project Texas, TikTok’s $1.5 billion initiative designed to ensure U.S. user data is secure and the app remains free from foreign influence. During the hearing, several representatives flat-out rejected the plan, leaving TikTok in a difficult position. One of the only remaining solutions would be for the company to spin itself off from ByteDance, its Chinese parent. But just hours before Chew sat down to answer questions, Chinese officials signaled they would oppose such a sale.

That puts TikTok back in the same spot it was in three years ago, when then President Donald Trump said he wanted to block the app or force it to be sold to an American company. It’s still unclear what will ultimately happen to the platform, but I was struck by one particularly dubious line of questioning: Several lawmakers asked Chew why there was still dangerous or harmful content on TikTok when ByteDance’s domestic version of the app, Douyin, was sanitized and safe for children.

The truth is that Douyin is more PG-friendly because of China’s oppressive internet censorship regime, not because of ByteDance’s benevolence. China has chosen how it wants to regulate social media, and U.S. elected officials should not necessarily be looking to it for guidance or inspiration.

Louise

PostEmail
One Good Text

Justin Sherman is founder and CEO of the tech policy advisory firm Global Cyber Strategies and a senior fellow at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy, where he leads a project studying the data broker industry.

PostEmail
Enthusiasms

Phys.org

What shape creates no pattern? It’s not a riddle. It’s a geometry problem that has largely stumped researchers for decades. Think about those hexagon tiles on your bathroom floor — they create an endless pattern. But what if there were a shape that would fit together in the same way but wouldn’t create a pattern — no matter the size of the floor?

A group of mathematicians say they’ve found such a shape — known as an “Einstein shape” — and they’ve written a paper on it. It still needs to stand up to peer review, but it’s a fascinating discovery, and a kind of refreshing hat tip to the human mind. (In an era where you’d almost expect this kind of thing to be discovered by ChatGPT). And it could be useful in other areas of study, such as materials science or cryptography.

PostEmail
How Are We Doing?

Are you enjoying Semafor Tech? The more people read us, the better we’ll get. So please share it with your family, friends and colleagues to get those network effects rolling.

And hey, we can’t inform you on what’s happening in tech from inside your spam folder. Be sure to add reed.albergotti@semafor.com (you can always reach me by replying to these emails) and lmatsakis@semafor.com to your contacts. In Gmail, drag this newsletter over to your ‘Primary’ tab.

Thanks for reading.

Want more Semafor? Explore all our newsletters at semafor.com/newsletters

— Reed and Louise

PostEmail