There's Explosive Drama Between OpenAI and Microsoft
As the Wall Street Journal reports, OpenAI wants its longtime patron Microsoft to loosen its control on its AI products, while also seeking Microsoft's approval to let it become a for-profit company, which OpenAI has been planning for a while now.
But the negotiations have turned ugly. And OpenAI is so frustrated with its benefactor that behind the scenes, executives are considering the "nuclear option": going to court and accusing Microsoft of anticompetitive practices, according to the reporting. That could bring down a review by federal regulators and a public campaign railing against the tech monolith. An antitrust investigation is something that Microsoft has been paranoid about: as Reuters notes, it gave up a board observer seat at OpenAI last year to get US and UK antitrust regulators off its back.
It's a stunning breakdown in a relationship that's proven to be one of the most lucrative in tech history, per the WSJ. OpenAI arguably wouldn't be where it is without Microsoft's initial $1 billion investment back in 2019. And Microsoft wouldn't be able to cash in on the AI race — nor enjoy its considerable head start — without the breakout success of ChatGPT, a name that has become synonymous with AI itself.
Like certain sparring couples, the pair are still publicly insisting that they're getting along famously.
"We have a long-term, productive partnership that has delivered amazing AI tools for everyone," spokespersons for the two companies said in a joint statement, per the WSJ. "Talks are ongoing and we are optimistic we will continue to build together for years to come."
There's a lot on the line here. Microsoft benefits from having the rights and access to OpenAI's intellectual property, which it integrates into its own AI offerings like Copilot. OpenAI received heavy investment from the Redmond giant, which became the lifeblood of the company. Both are locked into a revenue-sharing agreement, though OpenAI has recently moved to decrease what it shares with its partner.
One point of contention is OpenAI's $3 billion acquisition of the coding startup Windsurf, according to the WSJ's sources. OpenAI doesn't want Microsoft, which has its own AI coding tool called GitHub Copilot that competes with OpenAI, to have access to Windsurf's IP — which again, under their current agreement, Microsoft technically would have the rights to.
Another is OpenAI's lengthy endeavor to become for-profit by converting into a public-benefit corporation. Microsoft isn't against the move, but it's reportedly asking for an even bigger stake in the would-be corporation that OpenAI won't even countenance. The pressure's on OpenAI to complete the restructuring, because if it doesn't by the end of the year, it could lose out on an astonishing $20 billion in funding, notes the WSJ. Shortly prior to the paper's reporting, The Information reported that OpenAI wants Microsoft to relinquish its rights to all of OpenAI's future profits in exchange for a 33 percent stake in the new company.
Further down the line, the current partnership is supposed to end if OpenAI ever achieves artificial general intelligence, or AGI, meaning a powerful AI that rivals or exceeds human levels of intelligence. It's not clear if this is even possible, let alone if it could be achieved any time soon, but Microsoft is reportedly demanding it keep its access to OpenAI's products even after this milestone, in what OpenAI sees as breaking the terms of the agreement.
Cracks have shown elsewhere before this latest escalation. On top of benefiting from its investment, OpenAI has historically depended on Microsoft to supply the vast computing power necessary to train and run its AI models. But OpenAI has started to court others to fill this role as part of its massive Stargate Project, including software giant Oracle, which has agreed to buy $40 billion of Nvidia AI chips to power OpenAI's new US data center. OpenAI has even clinched a deal with Google to gain access to its vast computing capacity, Reuters reported last week.
We'll have to see how this shakes out — but we're not necessarily anticipating a chummy conclusion.
More on OpenAI: Sam Altman Says "Significant Fraction" of Earth's Total Electricity Should Go to Running AI
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Much Money Did Natasha Howard Earn After Winning Commissioner's Cup MVP?
How Much Money Did Natasha Howard Earn After Winning Commissioner's Cup MVP? originally appeared on Athlon Sports. The Indiana Fever and Minnesota Lynx faced off Tuesday night in the Commissioner's Cup Championship. Many expected the Lynx, who came in at 14-2, to take care of business with ease, especially with Caitlin Clark out with a groin injury. Advertisement That wasn't the case, even after Minnesota jumped out to an early 13-point lead. From the midpoint of the second quarter on, it was all Fever. Natasha Howard led the way for Indiana, finishing with 16 points, 12 rebounds and four assists in the 74-59 win. It marked the Fever's first Commissioner's Cup title in franchise history, and Howard was named MVP. With the win, the Fever earned a share of $500,000 and $120,000 in cryptocurrency from Coinbase. As MVP, Howard also took home an extra $5,000. Indiana Fever forward Natasha Howard (6) was named the MVP in the Commissioner's Cup title win.© Jesse Johnson-Imagn Images Howard signed with Indiana as a free agent this offseason and has brought a veteran presence in her 12th WNBA season. She was originally drafted fifth overall by the Fever in the 2014 WNBA draft and played two seasons with the team before moving on to Minnesota. Advertisement After two seasons there, the 6-foot-3 forward played three for the Seattle Storm, two for the New York Liberty and two for the Dallas Wings. Entering Tuesday night, Howard had career averages of 11.5 points, 5.6 rebounds and 1.5 assists per game. The Fever will enjoy the big win, but they need to get back to work quickly as they host the Las Vegas Aces on Thursday night. Tip-off at Gainbridge Fieldhouse is scheduled for 7 p.m. ET on Prime Video. Related: WNBA Star Responds After Being Ranked Above Caitlin Clark in All-Star Player Voting Related: Kelsey Plum Directly Addresses Caitlin Clark, Rest of WNBA's Shooting Struggles This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jul 2, 2025, where it first appeared.
Washington Post
15 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Once known as 'Dirty Myrtle,' Myrtle Beach is now the fastest-growing US metro for seniors
A South Carolina beach town once nicknamed 'Dirty Myrtle' because of its rowdy nightclubs and strip joints has become a magnet for retirees in a nation that continues to age. The number of residents age 65 years and older in the Myrtle Beach metropolitan area grew by 6.3% last year, making it the fastest-growing metro area for senior citizens in the U.S., according to population estimates the U.S. Census Bureau released last week. During the 2020s, Myrtle Beach's senior population has grown by more than 22%, also the fastest rate in the United States this decade. Senior citizens now make up more than a quarter of the around 413,000 residents in metro Myrtle Beach, which once was known for being a budget beach destination. The community with a mile-long boardwalk and 200-foot Ferris wheel used to attract biker rallies which the city tried to end in the late 2000s because of the noise, traffic and rowdiness. But now the noisy streets have had to make room for quiet diners and pickleball courts. The COVID-19 pandemic played a role in the area's senior boom as people in such places as Ohio and New York who had been vacationing for years in Myrtle Beach realized they could retire early or work from home anywhere, said Mark Kruea, a longtime public information officer for Myrtle Beach who is now running to be mayor. 'Many people converted that thought into action,' Kruea said. 'The climate's great, taxes are low, there's a wealth of opportunities for recreation, dining and shopping.' The U.S. population age 65 and older rose by 3.1% last year, while the population under age 18 decreased by 0.2%. In the past two decades, seniors have increased from 12.4% to 18% of the U.S. population, while the share of children has dropped from 25% to 21.5%, according to the population estimates. Maine, Vermont, and Florida were the only three states where older adults outnumbered children as recently as 2020. But four years later, those states were joined by Delaware, Hawaii, Montana, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and West Virginia. Maine last year had the oldest median age at 44.8, while Utah's was the youngest at 32.4. The share of the U.S. population that is Hispanic reached 20% last year for the first time, helped by an annual gain of 1.9 million Hispanics mostly through migration. In pure numbers, the Hispanic population grew the most last year in the New York, Houston and Miami metro areas. When it comes to growth rates, the biggest gains were in smaller metros such as Ocala, Florida; Panama City, Florida; and St. Joseph, Missouri. For Black residents whose growth last year was split between migration and natural increase, the biggest gains were in the Houston, New York and Dallas-Fort Worth metro areas in pure numbers. Bozeman, Montana, and Provo, Utah — metro areas with tiny Black populations to start with — were tops in growth rates. In pure numbers, the New York, Dallas-Fort Worth and Seattle metro areas had the biggest Asian population gains, and the growth came primarily from migration. The largest growth rates were in three metro areas with small Asian populations: Farmington, New Mexico; Bismarck, North Dakota; and Burlington, North Carolina. The non-Hispanic white population in the United States declined slightly last year, but it grew the most in the Nashville, Tennessee; New York and Charlotte, North Carolina metro areas in pure numbers. The biggest growth rates for the white population were in the Myrtle Beach; Daphne-Fairhope, Alabama; and Wilmington, North Carolina metro areas. The decline in the white population was driven by deaths outpacing births. ___ Follow Mike Schneider on the social platform Bluesky: @ .
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Trump's big budget bill would jump-start his immigration agenda
Building the border wall. Increasing detention capacity. Hiring thousands of immigration agents. The budget bill narrowly approved by the Senate on Tuesday includes massive funding infusions — roughly $150 billion — toward immigration and border enforcement. If passed, the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" will cement President Trump's hard-line legacy on immigration. Read more: By a single vote, Trump's megabill passes the Senate The budget bill would make Immigration and Customs Enforcement the highest-funded law enforcement agency in the federal government, exceeding its current yearly $3.4-billion detention budget many times over. It also would impose fees on immigration services that were once free or less expensive and make it easier for local law enforcement to work with federal authorities on immigration. The 940-page Senate bill will now head back to the House, which passed its version in May, also by one vote, 215 to 214. The two chambers must now reconcile the two versions of the bill. Though the legislation is still evolving, the immigration provisions in the House and Senate versions are similar and not subject to the intense debates on other issues, such as Medicaid or taxes. Many of the funds would be available for four years, though some have longer or shorter timelines. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that, if enacted, the bill would increase the deficit by at least $3.3 trillion over the next 10 years. Here are key elements concerning immigration: $46.5 billion toward fortifying the U.S.-Mexico border wall and interdicting migrant smugglers at sea. This includes building barrier sections and access roads and installing barrier-related technology such as cameras, lights and sensors. The legislation doesn't reference specific locations. Trump, in his first term, repeatedly vowed that Mexico would pay for the wall. It didn't. $32 billion for immigration enforcement, including staffing of ICE and expanding so-called 287(g) agreements, in which state and local law enforcement agencies partner with federal authorities to deport immigrants. $7 billion for hiring Border Patrol agents, customs officers at ports of entry, air and marine agents and field support staff; retention bonuses; and vehicles. $3.3 billion to hire immigration judges and support staff, among other provisions. Trump has said he wants to hire 10,000 ICE agents, as well as 3,000 Border Patrol agents. $45 billion to build and operate immigrant detention facilities and to transport those being deported. $5 billion for new Customs and Border Protection facilities and improvements to existing facilities and checkpoints. It's unclear how this could affect California or the Border Patrol checkpoint on Interstate 5 near San Onofre. The bill allows for families to be detained indefinitely, pending a removal decision.. Heidi Altman, vice president of policy at the National Immigration Law Center, called that a blatant violation of the so-called Flores settlement agreement, which has been in place since 1977 and limits to 20 days the duration children can legally be detained. $13.5 billion to reimburse states and local governments for immigration-related costs. These are divided into two pots of funding: $10 billion for the "state border security reinforcement fund" and the "Bridging Immigration-related Deficits Experienced Nationwide" or BIDEN fund. Both would fund the arrest by local law enforcement of immigrants who unlawfully entered the U.S. and committed any crime. "You can think of it like a gift for [Texas Gov. Greg] Abbott," Altman said. A fee of at least $100 for those seeking asylum, down from a $1,000 fee outlined in the House bill. Applicants also would pay $100 every year the application remains pending. This is unprecedented — a fee has never before been imposed on migrants fleeing persecution. At least $550 ($275 on renewal) to apply for employment authorization for those with asylum applications, humanitarian parole and temporary protected status. Currently there is no fee for asylum seekers and a $470 fee for others. At least $500 for temporary protected status, up from $50. The stated fees are minimums — the bill allows for annual increases and, for many, prohibits waivers based on financial need. "The paradox of a fee for an employment authorization document is that you're not allowed to work, but you need to pay for the fee," said Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a policy analyst with the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute. Altman noted that imposing a yearly fee on asylum seekers for their pending applications punishes people for the U.S. government's backlogged system, which is out of the applicant's control. Other sections exclude lawfully present immigrants, such as refugees and those granted asylum, from benefits including Medicare, Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Another provision excludes children from the child tax credit if their parent lacks a Social Security number. Altman, whose organization has closely tracked the immigration aspects of the funding bill, said people can look at the legislation two ways: big picture — as a $150-billion infusion to supercharge what the Trump administration has already started — or surgically, as a series of policy changes that will not be easy to undo "and make an already corrupt system subject to even fewer safeguards and really go after people's most basic needs." Bush-Joseph had a different view. She said the funding reinforces an outdated and inflexible immigration system without fundamentally changing it. "That's why there's all this money going to the border even though there aren't a lot of people coming now," she said. Money alone won't change things overnight, Bush-Joseph said. It takes time to hire people and to open detention facilities. Immigration judges will still have a massive backlog of cases. And getting foreign countries to agree to accept more deportees is tricky. "Arresting and detaining people with private contractors doesn't get you to an agreement from El Salvador to take five more planes per week," she said. During a White House event Thursday, Trump urged Congress to pass the bill quickly, saying it "will be the single most important piece of border legislation to ever come across the floor of Congress." Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, one of three Republicans who voted against the bill Tuesday, had called it "reckless spending," writing on X: "I'm all for hiring new people to help secure our borders, but we don't need it to the extent that's in this bill, especially when our border is largely contained." Across the political aisle, Democrats including California Sen. Alex Padilla have slammed the bill, saying the immigration-related funding increases amount to a substantial policy change. 'You would think that maybe just for a moment, Republicans would take this reconciliation process as an opportunity to do what they said before they wanted to do and modernize our nation's immigration system," Padilla said last month. "But they're not." Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
