[HN Gopher] Elon Musk drops suit against OpenAI and Sam Altman
___________________________________________________________________
Elon Musk drops suit against OpenAI and Sam Altman
Author : hggh
Score : 156 points
Date : 2024-06-11 20:38 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.cnbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.cnbc.com)
| minimaxir wrote:
| Elon likely got sufficient satisfaction weirdly complaining about
| Apple and OpenAI's partnership on Twitter/X yesterday.
| whalesalad wrote:
| https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1800265431078551973
| cjk2 wrote:
| Says the guy selling data collection machines on wheels...
|
| Asshat!
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| sour grapes
| threeseed wrote:
| I suspect he was trying to negotiate a place for Grok in
| Apple's LLM story.
|
| With Google, Apple and Samsung having their own locked-in
| strategies there is now no pathway for Grok to any relevance.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _With Google, Apple and Samsung having their own locked-in
| strategies there is now no pathway for Grok to any relevance_
| (
|
| Why wouldn't Apple license Grok?
| lanstin wrote:
| Because they have a brand reputation and all the (recent)
| words coming out of Elon, his media platform, and his AI
| are shit and people don't like them and it would conflict
| with Apple's brand image - they don't even let movie
| villains use iPhones and you think they'd put the potty
| mouthed, anti-science pro-fascism LLM he's trying to make
| onto their phones?
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Sorry, I should have said why _couldn 't_ Apple license
| Grok. Their deal with OpenAI isn't exclusive, after all.
|
| Musk's shenanigans are good reasons for Cupertino to keep
| a wide berth.
| threeseed wrote:
| Elon's record on trust and safety is not in-line with
| Apple's values.
|
| And ignoring that its quality is far behind OpenAI, Gemini,
| Anthropic etc.
| rodgerd wrote:
| I dunno, why wouldn't you want an LLM trained by a company
| whose owner keeps inviting child pornographers and neo-
| Nazis to post? What could possibly go wrong?
| ClassyJacket wrote:
| Please do show me where he explicitly invited child
| pornographers. Go ahead, link me to the specific place
| where he said that. I want to see what he said word for
| word.
| LordDragonfang wrote:
| Discussion from the initial filing:
|
| Elon Musk sues Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and OpenAI [2024-03-01]
| (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39559966)
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| This was always "lawsuit as press release", and despite the fact
| that I may agree that how OpenAI essentially morphed into a for-
| profit entity was dubious, Musk looked a bit ridiculous when it
| came out that he was essentially just butt hurt that _he_ didn 't
| get to take control of OpenAI under Tesla.
| robotnikman wrote:
| >how OpenAI essentially morphed into a for-profit entity
|
| This is my big issue with them as well, and the fact that they
| still stick to 'Open'AI as their name. They might as well just
| sell themselves to Microsoft at this point.
|
| Of course that lawsuit probably was not going to go anywhere
| though, seems like it was just for publicity.
| wnevets wrote:
| > "It's certainly a good advertisement for the benefit of Elon
| Musk," Kevin O'Brien, partner at Ford O'Brien Landy LLP and
| former assistant U.S. attorney, told CNBC at the time. "I'm not
| sure about the legal part though."
| Havoc wrote:
| Neither of them are doing their image any favours lately.
|
| They'd do much better if they just shut up & built...something
| they're both clearly good at
| tmpz22 wrote:
| Whats wrong with their image? They're still able to raise
| billions no problem. Their day to day doesn't change.
|
| Altman just did a big deal with Apple.
|
| Musk's board is still likely to cram through a $45B+ comp
| package for him.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Altman has a basically fine image I think, in the sense that
| nobody outside of tech circles knows his name, and everyone
| in tech circles must at least admit that he's good at getting
| investors.
|
| Musk has a reputation as being too demanding, which is one
| thing if you are doing something revolutionary, but nowadays
| the market has mostly caught up to his cars. It seems all
| that over-working his employees has done is produced poor QA.
|
| He's also politically alienating to liberals, who would
| otherwise be inclined to buy his cars.
| RIMR wrote:
| This is a strange comment. Economic success and executive pay
| packages don't disqualify the claim that there is an image
| problem.
|
| If anything, Musk getting a $45B package after a year of
| failures and layoffs at Tesla is something that tarnishes
| Musk and Tesla's image. The fact that this cash package is
| almost exactly what he owes creditors for the loans he took
| out buying Twitter, it almost looks like he's begging Tesla
| for an undo button for his own terrible decisions.
|
| As for Apple making a deal with OpenAI, the fact that every
| product integrating ChatGPT is just being ruthless
| enshittified as a result, this is terrible optics for Apple
| when their biggest competitor, Microsoft, is currently
| playing target practice with its feet shipping poorly advised
| AI integrations (see: Recall).
|
| As for OpenAI's image, the only thing they have going for
| them is the technical impressiveness of ChatGPT -
| organizationally everyone I know in the tech space assumes
| that OpenAI is a dumpster fire of a company.
| rayiner wrote:
| > If anything, Musk getting a $45B package after a year of
| failures and layoffs at Tesla is something that tarnishes
| Musk and Tesla's image
|
| I hate to defend executive comp, but Tesla's market cap has
| gone up by $487 billion (almost 10x) since he was awarded
| that comp package in 2018. Half of all EVs sold in the US
| are Teslas. In 2023, the Model Y was the world's
| bestselling car, outselling the Toyota Corolla. That's
| completely insane. What more do you want?
| threeseed wrote:
| a) Full-time, engaged CEO free of conflicts of interest
| e.g. X.ai.
|
| b) Stop devaluing the Tesla brand with his controversial,
| inflammatory comments.
|
| c) Compensation package that is more reasonable compared
| with other companies.
| troupo wrote:
| > but Tesla's market cap has gone up by $487 billion
| (almost 10x) since he was awarded that comp package in
| 2018
|
| The speculation on Tesla's stock raised the "market cap".
| Any stock that Tesla doesn't own brings Tesla exactly 0
| dollars, no matter how hight the illusionary market cap
| there is.
|
| How much of the stock does Tesla actually own? How much
| of the stock that Tesla owns can the company safely sell
| to offset the $45 billion of _actual_ money that they had
| to cough up for Elon?
| tedunangst wrote:
| They're not writing Elon a check for $45 billion.
| troupo wrote:
| Yeah, if it was just stock, then its value fluctuates
| wildly
| BlarfMcFlarf wrote:
| It's also, what, 3 years of profits by Tesla? Where does
| the money come from?
| renewiltord wrote:
| Should've let him keep the options we granted him back in
| 2018. Taking away his performance-based compensation is
| total bullshit. I voted to give it back. His options were
| worthless for most of that time. He got the stock to
| appreciate a lot and some guy with 6 shares sued him for
| this crap so that the lawyers and him could split $5 b
| that a judge granted them.
|
| If anyone took away a software engineers options here
| after a company became successful because the company
| later decided it's too much there'd be hell to pay.
| Everyone rightfully complained about Zynga doing this.
|
| But here it's fine? Bullshit. I voted to pay the man his
| due. I voted to move the corp out of Delaware to Texas.
| He made me money under reasonable terms. Back then
| everyone said he'd just fail.
| ProfessorLayton wrote:
| >...Tesla's market cap has gone up by $487 billion
| (almost 10x) since he was awarded that comp package in
| 2018
|
| Another way to think about this is that investors are in
| a position where they got that wildly ambitious growth,
| and are currently _not obligated_ to pay for it, so why
| would they? This is to the guy that has no problems
| breaking contracts of his own, and gives the finger to
| people he owes money to.
|
| I guess we'll see when this comes to a vote, but it would
| be shrewd business not to.
| snowwrestler wrote:
| Boards are supposed to be forward-looking. Typically a
| board would electively reward a CEO who has delivered
| out-sized performance out of fear that the CEO would
| leave for a different job (creating a bad future for the
| company).
|
| This situation, though, has a different set of forward-
| looking concerns. Musk already has several other jobs.
| And the primary concern is that he wants this large pay
| package so that he can have more personal resources to
| put toward those other jobs (at the expense of Tesla).
|
| As it stands now, Musk's personal financial position
| depends on leverage against his Tesla position. This
| binds him to Tesla's future performance. Giving him a
| huge personal pay package essentially weakens that
| binding, giving him greater license to deprioritize his
| Tesla leadership in favor of SpaceX, Xai, Neuralink, etc.
|
| There is an argument to be made that Tesla's board should
| be essentially antagonistic toward Musk's other
| companies, given that his time and attention are finite
| resources, and Tesla is a public company. The board has
| responsibilities to investors to maximize their return,
| which should take precedence over whatever feelings of
| gratitude or connection they feel toward Musk personally.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _What more do you want?_
|
| I believe in honouring deals, even if it's unsavoury _ex
| post facto_. Until recently, that meant approving the pay
| package.
|
| But Musk unilaterally amended the deal when he
| "threatened on X...to develop AI elsewhere if he doesn't
| get a 25% stake in Tesla" [1]. Then he developed AI
| elsewhere [2]. If you promise to give me a dollar, you
| dither, I say I'll burn your house down if you don't, and
| then I burn your house down, I don't believe you owe me
| the dollar anymore.
|
| Musk should offer to return xAI's funding and merge it
| into Tesla in exchange for the vote.
|
| [1] https://apnews.com/article/tesla-elon-musk-pay-
| package-share...
|
| [2] https://x.ai/blog/series-b
| Havoc wrote:
| >Whats wrong with their image? They're still able to raise
| billions no problem. Their day to day doesn't change.
|
| Not sure I'd classify either of those as "image".
| deepfriedchokes wrote:
| It would be great if both of these guys would become eccentric
| recluses like Howard Hughes.
| throw0101d wrote:
| > [...] _eccentric recluses like Howard Hughes._
|
| And not an eccentric recluse like Ted Kaczynski:
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski
| Coolbeanstoo wrote:
| A recluse like Kaczynski with the resources of someone like
| Elon Musk would be world or at very least American society
| levels of quite interesting
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| Or we just go back to 5 years ago Elon where he tweeted about
| rockets instead of far right conspiracy theories.
| ToucanLoucan wrote:
| > They'd do much better if they just shut up &
| built...something they're both clearly good at
|
| That would require either of them to be good at building
| anything, and I don't think either has ever demonstrated that.
| They're just money men, and Musk went out of his way to PR
| himself as the real life Iron Man before utterly ruining it
| because he can't shut his mouth when he really, really should.
| Havoc wrote:
| >I don't think either has ever demonstrated that.
|
| So what's your space company called?
| NickC25 wrote:
| Seriously. Musk has enough money to fuck off and go build
| something.
|
| His political and economic opinions are pretty bad. He should
| just shut up.
| GaggiX wrote:
| He'll never shut up, people will learn to ignore him if they
| haven't already.
| r00fus wrote:
| Musk was always the money and hype guy - he has personally
| built nothing. Tesla was not founded by him, SpaceX is
| Gwynne's baby, not his. Twitter still hasn't recovered from
| being X'd by Musk.
| woooooo wrote:
| I think this is taking it too far. There are a lot of money
| and hype guys out there, none of the rest of them
| transformed the automotive and space industries. Most of
| them were shoveling money into "disrupt laundry" startups
| instead.
| wustangdan wrote:
| Just to be clear, you're saying that Shotwell has
| contributed more to SpaceX than Elon?
|
| What about, without Elon they'd have reusable rockets but
| without Shotwell they wouldn't? Do you believe this?
|
| I get you hate Elon but at some point these takes are just
| so outrageous I can't believe you are making them in good
| faith.
| chipdart wrote:
| > Just to be clear, you're saying that Shotwell has
| contributed more to SpaceX than Elon?
|
| Which contribution do you believe that Elon Musk had on
| the development of reusable rockets?
|
| Let's put it this way: if you kicked Musk out of SpaceX
| and replaced it with absolutely any random guy as CEO, do
| you believe reusable rockets would never see the light of
| day?
| wustangdan wrote:
| Okay read Walter Isaacson and Vances biography and get
| back to me. There is hundreds of examples in each. Or
| read this thread that has a few snippets from the book. h
| ttps://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/k1e0ta/evid
| en...
|
| He is a constant technical driving force.
|
| > if you kicked Musk out of SpaceX and replaced it with
| absolutely any random guy as CEO, do you believe reusable
| rockets would never see the light of day?
|
| Would we have reusable rockets in the same timeline as
| SpaceX, absolutely not. The proof is all the other rocket
| companies that have failed to do so, including government
| entities.
|
| So yah obviously if Musk never founded SpaceX, we would
| not have reusable rockets right now.
| bilvar wrote:
| Yes. Everyone was ridiculing him for believing they could
| do it. Including industry experts.
| Prickle wrote:
| Yes, unironically.
|
| In the USA you have the SLS, which can only be described
| as a congressionally designed failure.
|
| Past experiments by NASA for self landing rockets had
| their funding denied as well.
|
| In the EU there was the Arianespace CEO who explicitly
| said that self landing rockets were a waste of time.
|
| In Japan, space experimentation and failures are such a
| public nightmare we would never have bothered.
|
| The idea of losing dozens of rockets in order to aim for
| reusability would have been untenable.
|
| Starship would not exist. Because the idea of a rocket
| with that many engines on the booster was also believed
| to be impractical.
|
| Elon is egomaniacal sure, but that's only magnified by
| his status as a CEO. His behavior, unfortunately pretty
| close to the average person.
|
| Doesn't change the fact that SpaceX under his leadership
| is the only reason we have reusable rockets, or the
| ridiculously ambitious Starship launches.
|
| No one could have predicted the current incredible
| cadence of launches by SpaceX either.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _if you kicked Musk out of SpaceX and replaced it with
| absolutely any random guy as CEO, do you believe reusable
| rockets would never see the light of day?_
|
| Any time prior to ~2014, absolutely.
| havefunbesafe wrote:
| I could be wrong, but it seems as though he built Zip2?
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip2
| mlindner wrote:
| This is such a poor hot take. Literally every single person
| that has personally dealt with him disagrees this
| narrative. It's only popular on reddit/hacker news boards
| and among some journalists. Karpathy has a good discussion
| on it that I've heard several employees at his other
| companies agree with.
|
| Karpathy: https://old.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1bp
| wo0w/andrej...
|
| Tom Mueller: https://i.redd.it/89dqiz2lc2t81.jpg
|
| Or even Shotwell herself for that matter and how she has
| expressed how she and Elon subdivide the work.
|
| Elon Musk is not nice person, but he gets things done and
| he's deeply involved in the day-to-day activities of his
| companies. I know a low level software engineer at SpaceX
| and he regularly attends their team meetings and
| contributes.
| blackeyeblitzar wrote:
| The original Tesla guys recognized and agreed Musk was a
| founder as part of their settlement, and this is now both
| the formal and legal truth of Tesla. I think some others
| were also recognized as founders too. The two initial guys
| didn't really achieve anything prior to Musk and other
| early people joining.
|
| Calling SpaceX Gwynne's baby is just straight up
| misinformation. Talk to actual employees from SpaceX,
| especially early on. They'll tell you that Musk actually
| does get involved in various deep aspects of the vehicles.
| You might not be aware, but Gwynne Shotwell was in BD not
| product.
| nostrademons wrote:
| My pet theory is that Musk basically unraveled when the study
| came out that there does not exist enough CO2 on Mars to
| terraform the planet:
|
| https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/mars-terraforming-not-
| poss...
|
| Note the date on that: it was published in Nature on July 30
| 2018, and it wouldn't surprise me if somebody would've sent a
| preprint to Musk up to a month before then. The "pedo guy"
| tweet during the Thai cave rescue was July 18 2018. Musk's
| "funding secured" Tweet that the SEC sanctioned him over was
| Aug 7 2018. His appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast was
| September 2018. Most of his children and extramarital affairs
| post-date 2018; at that point, he only had the 5 with Justine
| Musk. Pre-2018, most of his ideas were crazy but at least
| engineering-focused on reasonable causes.
|
| Musk has repeatedly said his ambition is to die on Mars.
| After a reputable scientific paper came out saying that if
| you step off Starship, that will be the very first thing you
| do, he doesn't really have anything to live for. Meanwhile
| he's given up so much for that goal (most notably, his first
| family) that it must feel pretty bitter to have invested so
| much in something impossible.
|
| For that matter, the psychology is likely pretty similar to
| the core MAGA demographic, many of whom work hard all their
| life to achieve the American Dream and then find that the
| American Dream is going to _other_ people.
| neilv wrote:
| People can come back from shattered dreams, and he can
| afford any therapist.
|
| Being a billionaire makes pivoting to executing on new
| dreams easier.
|
| Newfound empathy could give him a new dream of making that
| American Dream happen for others.
| EnigmaFlare wrote:
| Bad means they're different from your own which are
| automatically good because NickC25 is the ultimate arbiter of
| how good political and economic opinions are?
|
| Many public figures just copy popular opinions and present
| them as their own precisely so that most people will like
| them. They haven't even tried to understand what they're
| talking about. At least Musk has some understanding and isn't
| driven by conformity.
| ilikeitdark wrote:
| The big question is....whose going to play Elon Musk in the true-
| to-life film version, about the slow downfall of the man who
| wanted to be king of everything, but ended up a nothing as part
| of a musical duo with Kanye West, with a Reno casino resort
| residency.
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| I could have been a contender :).
| jjk166 wrote:
| Kevin Durand was born for the role.
| silisili wrote:
| I never thought about it before, but you're right. He's got
| such an odd presence and unidentifiable accent(to me) in most
| of his roles, I think he'd be about the best we could ask
| for.
| pedroma wrote:
| I'd watch Elon Musk starring Kanye West as Elon Musk.
| indoordin0saur wrote:
| His pipedream rocket company just succeeded at launching and
| landing the most impressive vehicle ever built by man. You
| could watch high-def live footage as the thing re-entered at
| the atmosphere at 20,000mph thanks to the space internet system
| that is rapidly becoming the best in the world. And in two days
| he's getting a $56 billion pay day granted to him by Tesla
| shareholders. It's a little early for schadenfreude.
| jcranmer wrote:
| From the docket
| (https://webapps.sftc.org/ci/CaseInfo.dll?CaseNum=CGC24612746, if
| links work correctly), it seems that this is Musk dismissing the
| case without prejudice (i.e., he can litigate the claims again if
| he wants) on the eve of a hearing asking the case to be dismissed
| with prejudice (i.e., precluding him from litigating the claims
| again).
|
| Which makes me think this is a "you can't fire me because I quit"
| kind of action.
| rmbyrro wrote:
| I think he feels bad for leaving OpenAI and is now jealous of
| what they accomplished. He probably just wanted to cast legal
| doubt over OpenAI's ability to profit from closed-source
| models. Which he managed to accomplish. If this hurts OpenAI's
| prospects to raise money is yet to be seen. I hope not...
| belter wrote:
| Or maybe his lawyers explained to him the meaning of legal
| discovery...
| threeseed wrote:
| > Which he managed to accomplish
|
| He accomplished absolutely nothing.
|
| OpenAI has established lucrative partnerships with Apple and
| Microsoft and are the primary platform developers are
| building their applications on. They will have no problem
| profiting and raising money.
| truncate wrote:
| The way things are going, OpenAI can experiment on puppies
| and that'll still not affect their ability to raise money.
| They are clearly leading the space right now and making
| lucrative deals with most valuable companies out there.
| throw9474 wrote:
| Elon, was just outed by his own xAI, https://grook.ai/share?i
| d=e269e88a7b1a71eff4f176c864b30161&h...
| digging wrote:
| Why do I keep seeing this exact comment and what the hell
| is grook.ai? Can you provide some context?
| throw9474 wrote:
| AI connected the dots using public citations and
| concluded SpaceX is more about Wars than Mars.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| But they are both related. We need a 2nd planet because
| WW3 is imminent. And surely Musk and everyone else would
| know that 3rd World War is imminent. There's a clear
| conflict between democracy and dictatorship. There's no
| question about it that the Earth has high odds of being
| destroyed, so we need both, ways to have a Planet B as
| well as methods to prevent dictatorship of easily taking
| us over.
|
| If humanity was in harmony, and in agreement about how to
| approach the future we wouldn't need any other planets,
| probably, nearby in the future.
|
| But since humanity is at its breaking point in terms of
| tech and war, we need to do everything we can to ensure
| we have all bases covered.
| throw9474 wrote:
| It's way more direct if you read what it says
|
| Mindless Elon fans downvote it though.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| Please explain to me? I may be too dumb to understand the
| inbetween lines here.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| I'm not an Elon fan, but surely you agree that earth is
| probably going to be destroyed soon by either WW3 or any
| numerous climate change issues?
| wazer5 wrote:
| Reddit thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments
| /1daovey/elons_xai...
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| Well yes, but I wouldn't be surprised if Starlink was for
| nuclear?
|
| Why am I being downvoted here?
|
| US, Europe, west, and democracy in general, at current
| times needs to be 100% at its game on the most
| significant power in human history.
| beambot wrote:
| I'd be pretty peeved if I backed a non-profit through its
| most-risky early days only for them to turn around and shun
| the original philanthropic mission in the spirit of profit
| maximization...
| Filligree wrote:
| No, no, we've been over this. We're supposed to cheer on
| the capitalists on this forum.
| tw04 wrote:
| Not quite how that played out. He wanted complete control,
| they told him no, he pulled his money in the hopes of
| bankrupting them. When he reneged on the $1 billion he
| pledged in funding they were forced to seek funding
| elsewhere (Microsoft).
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/24/23654701/openai-elon-
| musk...
| xcv123 wrote:
| "in the hopes of bankrupting them"
|
| Where do you get that idea?
|
| How exactly were they entitled to his $1B donation?
| stale2002 wrote:
| > How exactly were they entitled to his $1B donation?
|
| They weren't. But neither is Musk entitled to anything
| from OpenAI and the lawsuit was BS.
|
| He pulled his donation because he wasn't given total
| control, and now he is being a sore loser about it with a
| failed lawsuit.
| xcv123 wrote:
| Fair enough. But I would do the same if I were in his
| shoes just out of spite for selling out to Microsoft. Sue
| them for everything they are worth.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| The person you are replying to said nothing about being
| entitled to the money. You are moving goal posts.
|
| This is the equivalent of me coming to you and promising
| you money so that you can pull off a risky business move,
| then at the critical moment when I don't like something
| pulling that money. Sure I might be entitled to do that
| as it is my money, but it's a dick move and would
| certainly leave you holding the bag.
| xcv123 wrote:
| "it's a dick move" implies that you are somehow entitled
| to that money. Otherwise it's a fair move.
|
| It is extremely delusional to expect to receive $1
| billion dollars unconditionally.
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| As my dad used to say: being an asshole isn't illegal.
| indoordin0saur wrote:
| OpenAI went from a not-for-profit institution seeking to
| build in a safe and fair way that wouldn't advantage a
| handful of tech elite to very much the opposite. We can
| speculate on Musk's own motivations or call him a
| hypocrite but he's not wrong in pointing out OpenAI's
| sketchy behavior.
| jorts wrote:
| If you read the article, in the emails published Musk
| acknowledged the need to start charging customers due to
| the high cost of service, so it's not like the other
| cofounders deceived him.
| indoordin0saur wrote:
| Yeah. Musk is cringe but on this he's right on this. OpenAI
| went from a company with noble aspirations to just another
| sketchy big tech company at odds with the interests of the
| rest of society.
| jonathankoren wrote:
| Yeah but the emails _with Elon_ show that the "open" and
| "nonprofit" part was always a fucking a scam.
| lossolo wrote:
| > is now jealous
|
| Reading his (already deleted) tweets from yesterday about the
| Apple and OpenAI announcement, I think you could be right.
| mlindner wrote:
| Why do people always assume anything he says isn't why he
| does what he does? He's repeatedly stated why he cares. It's
| rather frustrating. Like assume good faith please.
| rand1239 wrote:
| Nice. Do you actually realise these are just your beliefs and
| how you view the world? A good way to test this would be to
| check the number of zeroes in your bank account and Musk's
| net worth. Are they really close? No? Probably he has a
| different belief system then.
| mywittyname wrote:
| Can the the defendants request that the case be heard anyway,
| should they want to have the case dismissed with prejudice?
| jcranmer wrote:
| This is a bunch of legal procedure that I don't know with
| confidence, but my expectation is that the answer is
| "theoretically yes, but it won't be granted in this case."
| That is, the "theoretically yes" comes from some sort of
| mechanism to handle plaintiffs who pull this sort of stuff
| abusively, but Musk's (lawyers') actions here haven't reached
| anywhere near that level of abusiveness, so there's no reason
| to grant it.
| Hamuko wrote:
| Why give up a good vehicle for posturing?
| novok wrote:
| Ah now Elon's freakout about iOS's upcoming ChatGPT integration
| makes a little bit more sense now.
| warunsl wrote:
| How exactly? His tweets (at least to me) come off extremely
| jealous of the fact that Apple integrated with OpenAI.
| indoordin0saur wrote:
| I'm annoyed what was once an admirable mission of bringing
| open-source not-for-profit AI to the world was gleefully
| abandoned as soon as Micro$oft and now Apple threw some money
| their way. Seems understandable to be peeved if you were
| someone who put money and effort into this thing due to
| concerns about an AI arms race.
| Joel_Mckay wrote:
| One can clearly see E.l.o.n. and S.a.m. prototype models in the
| background:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkismK9a_84
|
| They should act more harmonious moving forwards... lol =3
| mullingitover wrote:
| I honestly wonder if Apple should come after him for libel after
| yesterday's comments.
|
| Apple exhaustively demonstrated privacy-focused AI integration in
| the OS using _local models_ , and the ability to dial out to the
| OpenAI API, but _only with the user authorizing every single
| call_.
|
| If Apple isn't going to publicly insult Elon's intelligence by
| accepting that he really believes his mentally bankrupt
| statements, he leaves them no choice but to file a libel case.
| His statements seemed to be carefully and maliciously prepared in
| a way that would damage Apple.
| loceng wrote:
| Good luck to Apple to prove damages.
|
| Could you actually outline for us what comments of his you're
| saying are libel, and explain why they're libel? Rather than
| just seemingly piling on the ad hominem in this thread.
| mullingitover wrote:
| His shrill statements implying that Apple will be piping all
| your private data to OpenAI are the exact opposite of what
| Apple demo'd. It's like they were designed to destroy
| consumer confidence in Apple's privacy protections across
| their entire product line, protections which Apple obviously
| designed at great expense and effort and are core to their
| business strategy.
|
| This is someone with 187 million twitter followers who knew
| his statements would reach headlines to influence far beyond
| even the massive following. I don't think it would be hard to
| prove a billion dollars or more in damages for the kind of
| legal team Apple could easily assemble.
| loceng wrote:
| Can you quote him directly please? You're saying implying
| but it's more likely you're placing that assumption or
| interpretation on it. Was it actually concerns he put
| forward of how easy it would actually be for Apple to do
| so, rather than claiming they will 100% do so?
|
| Re: "I don't think it would be hard to prove a billion
| dollars or more in damages for the kind of legal team Apple
| could easily assemble."
|
| It's practically impossible to prove - in fact his
| statement and his reach you talk about could perhaps even
| have driven up their revenue, if we're just going to play
| armchair expert and put assumptions forward as reality.
| stale2002 wrote:
| Thats not how libel works.
|
| He is allowed to dislike the fact that Apple is working
| with OpenAI.
|
| And whether or not it is good security practice isn't an
| objective fact and is instead a matter of opinion.
|
| In the USA, free speech protections are very strong and you
| aren't going to win a lawsuit just because someone doesn't
| like your product.
| brodo wrote:
| Most people know that Musk lies constantly. I think the smart
| thing for Apple is just to ignore him.
| chipdart wrote:
| I don't think that allowing a bully to smear anyone's
| reputation with each tantrum is a smart thing to do,
| specially as Musk's tantrum consists of attacking a central
| piece of Apple's sales pitch: security.
| stale2002 wrote:
| Well fortunately we live in the USA, where free speech
| protections are extremely strong.
|
| Someone not liking your product isn't going to result in a
| winning defamation lawsuit.
|
| Musk is free to attack the reputation of the trillion
| dollar for profit company all he likes.
| mullingitover wrote:
| My point is that it's arguably not a 'tantrum,' it's
| actually a strategically worded statement designed for
| maximum damage to Apple's business. The man isn't actually
| stupid. Musk is desperately trying to carve out space for
| his personal brand in AI, and to do that he needs to drag
| down major players like Apple. I think there's a strong
| case to be made that that's exactly what his move was.
|
| If he gets serious blowback he can try to claim 'free
| speech,' but weaponizing speech for malicious
| purposes/personal gain has never been a protected activity.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-06-11 23:00 UTC)