A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
Mastodon’s founder cedes control, refuses to become next Musk or Zuckerberg
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]
#technology #news
I'm going to download a sketchy Chinese app instead.
That's good on them for doing that. It is also good for Mastodon in general since it means they are building the staff that can grow the service.
There was no danger of that happening, Mr. Mastodon
Just for my understanding, wasn't OpenAI not also a nonprofit and is now a forprofit and the CEO is at least as bad as Zuckerberg?
I understand it will make it a little bit harder, but nothing prevents Mastodon to go the OpenAI way or is the situation different in some way?
... wasn't OpenAI not also ...
Uhm. No? Or yes? Maybe? 🤔😅
This was me directly translating from German I think :D
The main difference is that the project will be owned by the non-profit foundation. This still leaves mastodon.social in the for profit Mastodon gGmbH but Mastodon itself is safe.
Ah, of course the guy motivated by money ensures he can keep getting it.
Let's hope he will invest it in moderation worth a damn.
Sadly it sounds like he'll still be in charge of the project so he can keep ignoring user issues and pull requests that are actually useful and instead keep making changes that users don't like, want or need.
Also worth noting that this was done in Europe (not the US), so corrupting the nonprofit should be harder.
OpenAI is a for profit company, owned by a non profit. External investors can invest in the for profit subsidiary, but it is still owned by the non profit. Investors are only allowed a capped amount of profit. (The capped amount is still bajillions afaik). But the for profit is legally bound to follow the non-profit’s mission.
I didn’t know that! Thanks for the article