OpenAI employees did not want to go work for Microsoft

Perception of Microsoft vs OpenAI

• Many say OpenAI staff joined to avoid “big company” culture; Microsoft is seen by some as “big, slow, boring,” though others argue that’s outdated given Azure/AI efforts.
• Several note that culturally and product‑wise, OpenAI feels nimble and user‑centric, while Microsoft often feels coercive (e.g., Edge/Bing lock‑in, dark patterns).
• Counterpoint: Others highlight strong Microsoft engineering teams (Azure, AI research, VS Code, TypeScript) and say being the CEO’s “pet AI lab” would be highly privileged inside MS.

Compensation, Equity, and Tender Offer

• A major reason people didn’t want to move: they would likely lose OpenAI equity/PPUs and swap high‑upside private exposure for mature, lower‑growth Microsoft stock.
• The near‑term tender offer (letting employees sell vested equity at a sharply higher valuation) was described as a “massive payday” and central to many employees’ calculus.
• Some argue that for risk‑adjusted returns, guaranteed MSFT stock might beat speculative OpenAI upside; others say the growth potential at OpenAI dominates.

Pressure to Sign the Pro‑Altman Letter

• One self‑identified employee says the MS offer was informal and fast‑moving; many would have “seriously considered” it if it preserved team unity and reasonable comp.
• Multiple comments highlight peer pressure: influential, well‑paid staff allegedly called others late at night to push them to sign; some felt coerced despite not wanting Microsoft.
• Some speculate many signers mainly wanted the tender to go through, not necessarily to follow Altman or join Microsoft.

Microsoft’s Influence Over OpenAI

• One side claims the saga shows Microsoft can effectively reverse any OpenAI decision it dislikes, amounting to “pulling strings in the shadows.”
• Others push back: say there’s no clear evidence Microsoft engineered Altman’s rehiring or the board reversal; point out MS holds non‑voting shares and learned of the firing very late.
• Concern is raised that Microsoft may have extensive IP rights short of “AGI,” potentially locking in control over key models.

Sam Altman, Power, and Board Firing Saga

• Long subthread debates whether Altman is unusually “power‑seeking” or even “psychopathic”; others object to casual medical labeling and say he appears driven by impact and access, not money.
• Cited behaviors: alleged manipulation of the board, strategic use of employee loyalty, and public acknowledgment that he enjoys the power of running OpenAI.
• Explanations offered for the board’s failed ouster:
  • Board members, focused on a safety‑first nonprofit mission, saw commercialization and Altman’s behavior (e.g., side deals, lack of candor) as misaligned and fired him abruptly.
  • They underestimated Microsoft’s and employees’ backlash; once the company’s survival and IP coherence were threatened, they had little option but to reverse course and step down.
• Some argue the real “coup” was Altman and allies pushing out the board; others insist the board merely exercised its formal authority.

Nonprofit Mission vs. For‑Profit Incentives

• Several note a fundamental misalignment: a nonprofit “for humanity” atop a for‑profit entity whose staff are paid at top‑percentile levels with large equity‑like upside.
• Critics say this structure incentivizes employees to chase valuation and monetization, potentially at odds with safety and public‑interest goals.
• Others argue most employees are “mercenaries” everywhere; it’s leadership’s job to align them with the mission via governance, not personal beliefs.

Big Tech and AI Leadership

• Debate over whether Microsoft is truly “slow”: they missed smartphones, but many say they executed well on cloud and AI via OpenAI and internal models (e.g., Megatron‑Turing).
• Some predict Microsoft will dominate AI regardless of OpenAI; others see Google, Meta, Apple, or unknown players as potential leaders.
• Skepticism that OpenAI has anything close to “AGI”; most agree current LLMs are powerful but not general intelligence.

Views on Business Insider and Media

• Multiple commenters distrust Business Insider, citing its ownership by a controversial media conglomerate and tabloid‑style framing.
• Some call the article under‑evidenced and internally inconsistent, particularly around employee motivations and Microsoft’s actual intentions.