So, Microsoft is a big company that helps other companies do cool things with computers. One of those things they help with is called OpenAI, which makes smart computer programs that can talk and think. But sometimes, these smart programs can be AIgerous or cause problems, so Microsoft wants to make sure it has other options in case something goes wrong. That's why some people think Microsoft hired two smart people from another company called Inflection AI, so they have more ways to make computers that can talk and think. This way, if OpenAI has any issues, Microsoft can still work with these smart people and create cool things with computers. Read from source...

1. The headline is misleading and clickbait, implying that Microsoft is trying to reduce its dependency on OpenAI by hiring Inflection AI founders. This suggests a lack of trust or dissatisfaction with OpenAI, which may not be the case.
2. The article does not provide any concrete evidence or sources for this claim, relying on a tweet from Ark Invest's chief futurist as the only reference. This raises questions about the credibility and validity of the argument.
3. The article also introduces irrelevant information, such as mentioning Microsoft's support for OpenAI and its partnership with GitHub. These details do not directly relate to the main claim or add any value to the discussion. They may be included to create a positive image of Microsoft, but they distract from the core issue.
4. The article does not consider other possible motives or reasons for hiring Inflection AI founders, such as their expertise, innovation, or potential synergies with Microsoft's existing projects and goals. It focuses solely on the OpenAI aspect, which may be incomplete or inaccurate.
5. The article uses emotional language, such as "diversify its OpenAI risk/exposure," which implies a negative connotation and fear of losing something valuable. This appeals to the reader's emotions rather than providing a balanced and objective analysis.
6. The article does not provide any counterarguments or alternative perspectives, making it seem one-sided and biased. It assumes that Microsoft is acting out of necessity or concern, without considering other possibilities or motives.