Attached: 1 image
Seen on Bluesky:
Guy explains to CEO of Signal (messaging) that it's going to add "AI" to the service. She says no. He insists, not knowing or caring who he's talking down to.
While its non-profit nature may prevent this kind of corruption because it isn’t publicly traded, there’s still the matter of influence from funding.
That being said it’s less likely to happen without being caught, what with the annual audit requirements of non-profits and auditors being required to report funders with significant influence.
I help run a non-profit makerspace, and believe me, I know how non-profits in this country are bullshit. Not that my makerspace has done so, but when you go over the laws involved, it’s quite obvious how many loopholes there are. Just for starters, the board can pay itself whatever salary they like. As long as you do all the paperwork, tons of stuff is legal.
(I was President for a year. I got a salary of $0 like everyone else on the board.)
That said, the reports coming out of AI Now are not what AI advocates in venture capital want to hear. Not at all.
While its non-profit nature may prevent this kind of corruption because it isn’t publicly traded, there’s still the matter of influence from funding.
That being said it’s less likely to happen without being caught, what with the annual audit requirements of non-profits and auditors being required to report funders with significant influence.
Though crooked auditors do exist, sadly.
I help run a non-profit makerspace, and believe me, I know how non-profits in this country are bullshit. Not that my makerspace has done so, but when you go over the laws involved, it’s quite obvious how many loopholes there are. Just for starters, the board can pay itself whatever salary they like. As long as you do all the paperwork, tons of stuff is legal.
(I was President for a year. I got a salary of $0 like everyone else on the board.)
That said, the reports coming out of AI Now are not what AI advocates in venture capital want to hear. Not at all.
Fair enough! I appreciate that you’ve considered the possible bias