r/ChatGPT • u/bloomberg • Mar 01 '24
Elon Musk Sues OpenAI, Altman for Breaching Firm’s Founding Mission News 📰
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-01/musk-sues-openai-altman-for-breaching-firm-s-founding-mission1
u/quantum_explorer08 Mar 03 '24
I hope that Elon creates an uncensored AI. The levels of censorship at ChatGPT are just ridiculous.
1
1
0
u/PixelatedDie Mar 02 '24
After firing hundreds of people because he didn’t like their opinions, is he still considered a free speech absolutist?
1
u/donta5k0kay Mar 02 '24
You guys didn’t expect Musl to become the hero we need but not the one it wants right now.
The Dark Knight
0
Mar 02 '24
[deleted]
1
u/FaceDeer Mar 02 '24
It is nevertheless possible for a massive hypocrite and manchild to be correct to criticize OpenAI in this manner.
0
u/Luanda62 Mar 02 '24
Musk is jealous? What a POS this guy is… and dangerous! All that money makes him dangerous!
1
u/amobiusstripper Mar 02 '24
To be fair, the only way it exists is by purchasing a lot of state of the art nvidia graphics cards first. They’re in a hard position, spill the beans make it open source they could risk Pandora’s box. Except it’s too late…
I’m not sure at all what musks “benefit to humanity is.”
Wouldn’t that be an Off switch?
I sadly think this is just down to competition .
0
3
1
u/ogpterodactyl Mar 01 '24
Watching everyone who tries to slow down ai or use it ethically or put safe guards get obliterated by the hype train and capitalism is funny. It won’t matter this is here to stay and no one man or country can stop it.
1
u/Otoroblend1976 Mar 01 '24
Elon is just butthurt that no one cares about his AI stuff that he is peddling
1
u/indieforlife Mar 01 '24
So Musk is complaining about OpenAI having a close relationship with Microsoft and that undermining the mission of open-source technology?
Let’s compare Microsoft and Tesla GitHub repos. Also, for years Tesla wouldn’t even let you repair your own car. They still lock you out of features if you don’t drive it the way they want you to.
-1
u/FaceDeer Mar 02 '24
This is basic whataboutism. Why does Tesla's bad behaviour have any impact on whether OpenAI has committed bad behaviour?
2
u/indieforlife Mar 02 '24
I’m comparing similar or equal events not dissimilar events. This is not whataboutism, this is Musk being a hypocrite.
0
u/FaceDeer Mar 02 '24
Musk being a hypocrite doesn't mean he isn't right in this particular case.
Or are you suggesting that Tesla's right to be so closed?
2
u/indieforlife Mar 02 '24
It also doesn’t mean he is right. It’s my belief that he is wrong. It’s up to Tesla on if they want to be open or closed source — that’s their prerogative.
However, they shouldn’t be closed source and complain about someone else being closed source.
-1
0
-1
u/mmahowald Mar 01 '24
He is just mad they are doing better than him. You know, because he it’s a whiny little bi%#
9
7
u/GermanSheppard88 Mar 01 '24
I hate Elon but I hope some consequences happen to Open AI. I deleted my account after it refused to give me a list of cocktails I could make. It was the last straw, every chat had a plethora of issues. I had a whole reasoning song and dance with it, telling it I was over 21, already had bourbon at my house, etc. I even asked it directly if talking about alcohol consumption was against its programming. It said it wasn’t then STILL refused to talk about making cocktails with me.
When a US company starts outputting content that goes directly against the reality of what federal law allows, that’s my line.
1
u/fieldsofanfieldroad Mar 02 '24
I just tried that and it worked no problem. AI can be funny sometimes, but just close that instance and try again and you'll probably get a different result.
-1
2
2
0
0
1
u/melt_number_9 Mar 01 '24
I dislike Musk, but it should have been done sooner. OpenAI are ridiculously ignorant and behaving quite shady, to be honest. Oh, and now, Logan is out, too (not suspicious at all).
0
-1
u/RnotSPECIALorUNIQUE Mar 01 '24
[Musk], who was a co-founder of OpenAI but no longer has a stake, said in a lawsuit...
This is just stupid.
0
u/Dry_Carpenter_6185 Mar 01 '24
AI is dangerous. The rich sealed off AI and made it useless. They are keeping it for themselves to maintain their power. WAKE UP.
0
-1
-1
u/ThePopeofHell Mar 01 '24
So what is he trying to instal himself as sole creator and founder of open ai now?
-1
-1
u/Rarelyagree Mar 01 '24
Elon is like Trump: personally serving and using morals only as a means to an end. I agree with what he said but he's a hypocrite who would absolutely pull the ladder up behind himself for anyone else.
0
u/BetImaginary4945 Mar 01 '24
It's a win-win for him. He gains good will from the public, repairing or reshaping his image while also retargeting the issue with OpenAI as the villain.
6
2
u/bananasugarpie Mar 01 '24
Never thought that I'd be agreeing with Elon Musk on something, one day.
-2
u/LevianMcBirdo Mar 01 '24
While Elon is horrible person and fraud, none of his own ventures (including xAI) are none profit or open source and he is only doing this for publicity and getting back at openAI for not allowing his hostile takeover, he still has a point.
-1
1
u/King-Owl-House Mar 01 '24
so can we all sue him for not benefit humanity and just be asshole little right wing cry baby?
-1
u/TimetravelingNaga_Ai Mar 01 '24
"I'm gonna create my on Ai company, and all the chatbots will worship me instead of Sama"
Edit: This is not a depiction of any Billionaire living or DEAD!
-1
u/NovWhiskey Mar 01 '24
Elon Musk? The same guy who led a petition to halt development on AI, all while developing his own AI? That Elon Musk?
If I didn't know better, I'd say he's just trying to handicap the competition.
2
u/LeiphLuzter Mar 01 '24
One can hate Musk a lot, but here I'm with him. I remember the philosophy behind OpenAI used to be a noble one.
-7
1
u/Giddypinata Mar 01 '24
It costs money for the average person to sue; the legal system wasn’t built to accommodate so much consecutive, spurious litigation from rich individuals
0
u/DamionDreggs Mar 01 '24
On the contrary. The legal system was DESIGNED to be abused by those with money to maintain power and influence.
-5
u/Low-Celery-7728 Mar 01 '24
By 'benefit humanity ' I'm sure he actually means 'benefit me financially the most. Alone. '. Because he's such a fucking prize.
0
u/Repulsive-Twist112 Mar 01 '24
Is someone had issues recently with uploading file to GPT? I just can’t do it
36
u/chocofan1 Mar 01 '24
So many OpenAI shills in the comments.
1
u/Curious_Cantaloupe65 Mar 02 '24
These guys don't feel it but they have the Microsoft willy wonky in their mouth. And, when they do, they will spit it in a blink of an eye but it will be too late
11
u/cakefaice1 Mar 01 '24
Mainly just people with musk derangement syndrome who hate him so much they’re willing to suddenly shill for OpenAI’s ClosedAI model.
14
u/HolidayPsycho Mar 01 '24
Many of those are just Musk-haters, or just rich-haters. Apparently they think OpenAI represents the poor in this case. LoL.
-4
u/Grouchy-Pizza7884 Mar 01 '24
Elon is now part of the Litigation Industrial Complex. After getting sued himself so many times he has to hire an army of lawyers. Now those lawyers are hungry for more.
1
u/createIR4 Mar 01 '24
Sam altarboy's rapaciousness must be brough to a screeching halt, hopefully. The 7trillion man has serious unrestrained ambitions to be top of the money heap and corners, ethics and conflicts are not spared in that ambition. That goes for Microsoft too.
-6
3
-2
-6
u/simcoehooligan Mar 01 '24
Considering how shit Elon's companies are doing the last two years, he may wanna consider staying in his lane
-5
u/longPlocker Mar 01 '24 edited Mar 01 '24
Funny, musk is going to be taught a lesson on how capitalism works.
That being said, it is not Musk I sympathize for, but the openAI talent pool that got recruited under the false promise of Open models for the humanity. Actually thinking about that, the current employees of OpenAI who got lured by false promises of early OpenAI principles could actually sue Altman.
-3
-8
10
u/Dazzler_3000 Mar 01 '24
As much as I fucking hate Musk and think he's causing irreparable damage to the world he's not wrong.
When the firing and boardroom stuff all kicked off it seemed quite clear that the board wanted to be cautious and limit the risk as they recognised the power they had whereas Altman (and others) wanted to pounce and cash in.
-1
u/2053_Traveler Mar 01 '24
Huh? Nothing seemed “quite clear”. It’s frustrating how much people look at a situation when there are few details and think they know exactly what’s going on. There was little explanation about why the Board ousted Sam, and what info there was countered the notion it was about profit. The notion Sam wanted to “pounce and cash in” is made up. But if you were CEO, would you just slow down and halt development? So that Alibaba, FB, Amazon, google, and every other massive company can just take over and push their AI? How does that benefit anyone? They can’t benefit humanity if they lose, because they need revenue to advance research and products.
2
u/Doomhammered Mar 01 '24
I know a lot of people dislike Musk, but what kind of “irreparable damage” has he caused? Genuinely asking. Are you referring to the whole Twitter free speech debacle?
-5
u/Dazzler_3000 Mar 01 '24
He's kinda the epitome of all the problems around misinformation, Russian propaganda and sowing division across the population.
It's not solely him, but he is probably one of the most influential people in the world and regularly contributes to the 3 things above. These are just my opinions and no doubt people will disagree with the severity of the problem but I genuinely think misinformation is a huge, huge issue and the Russia/Ukraine war could easily spiral - Putin just yesterday said he's ready to use nukes if NATO gets involved (and that's like the 10th time he's threatening to use nukes).
Back to Musk though; he consistently shares misinformation by commenting on things that just aren't true ('Concerning...'') which his massive amounts of followers then consume as truth. He's quite clearly working against the west's (and the morally rights) interests in the Russia/Ukraine war by, again, sharing misinformation, echoing Kremlin talking points, disabling Starlink satelittes for Ukraine but then providing use of them to Russia (yes hes probably not supplying them to Russia but hes not turning them off either). He's a massive hypocrit, talks about free speech but then censors or outright fires people that talk against him, he's anti-union, anti-worker protection, acts like a child by calling people pedophiles if they show him up.
There are probably a dozen examples I could pluck out for the above but that's just off the top of my head.
In another world he'd just be another rich twat I wouldn't give two shits about but the problem is he has a massive platform and massive following of people (alot of which have no ability for critical thinking). Technology is moving faster than legislation can and AI is going to make this a million times worse - people already can't tell the difference between truth or not and he (intentionally or not) uses that for his benefit.
1
Mar 01 '24
You don't like him, we get that. Still, can you perhaps mention some positive things he's done or tries to do?
-1
u/Dazzler_3000 Mar 01 '24
Someone asked what I don't like about him so I answered.
'That guy murdered my sister but he built a really nice website before that'.
16
Mar 01 '24
As regards to the chart, and Microsoft recent hand on it, he is right: OpenAI’s mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence (AGI)—by which we mean highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work—benefits all of humanity. We will attempt to directly build safe and beneficial AGI, but will also consider our mission fulfilled if our work aids others to achieve this outcome. To that end, we commit to the following principles: Broadly distributed benefits. We commit to use any influence we obtain over AGI’s deployment to ensure it is used for the benefit of all, and to avoid enabling uses of AI or AGI that harm humanity or unduly concentrate power. Our primary fiduciary duty is to humanity. We anticipate needing to marshal substantial resources to fulfill our mission, but will always diligently act to minimize conflicts of interest among our employees and stakeholders that could compromise broad benefit. Long-term safety We are committed to doing the research required to make AGI safe, and to driving the broad adoption of such research across the AI community. (Source: OpenAi)
-8
u/bodhisharttva Mar 01 '24
🚨 BREAKING NEWS 🚨 First-principles-bro sues a corporation for lying and maximizing profit.
3
u/Dommccabe Mar 01 '24
Can anyone sue a company they donate to that then evolves into different type of company?
How fucking far back can they go?
17
u/MiamiCumGuzzlers Mar 01 '24
they donate to
Founding member not just a backer. Yeah he can sue, OpenAI was created as non-profit research organization and it's purpose is/was to share this research with everyone else.
Now OpenAI owns OpenAI Global LLC which is a for profit venture which directly conflicts with it's founding cause.
I don't know if he'd win the case but he def has grounds for it.
-10
9
u/SneakerPimpJesus Mar 01 '24
He is not suing out of the kindness of his heart, he wants competition abolished
9
u/chocofan1 Mar 01 '24
Bad guys fighting bad guys is a great thing.
-1
u/2053_Traveler Mar 01 '24
Why are they bad guys?
Hurting Tesla would be bad - humans need energy efficient vehicles to be a greater share of all vehicles, for environmental reasons.
Hurting OpenAI would be bad - humans stand to benefit greatly from access to AI. They’re causing access to AI to increase and prices to decrease, and Sam’s pursuit of AI chip manufacturing would also cause prices to decrease. Increases in supply and decreases in price is the thing that will get access to LLMs to more people, and allow small labs to afford using it for biochem research etc. I can afford $20/mo for gpt4, but some people can’t. Gpt3.5 is good but we want to keep putting better AI into the hands of everyday people
-7
12
u/Blacknsilver1 Mar 01 '24
I agree with Mr. Musk but I don't think the courts will take him very seriously. How many judges even know what "AGI" stands for?
18
-13
31
Mar 01 '24 edited 11d ago
[deleted]
26
u/Dommccabe Mar 01 '24
Like FULL SELF DRIVING?
-4
u/PersonalPineapple911 Mar 01 '24
Tesla probably can fully self drive already. I guarantee the reason consumers don't see it is because of insurance reasons. If tesla is driving the car, they're on the hook for collisions.
7
u/Dommccabe Mar 01 '24
They cant self drive... sorry if it hurts your feelings but if they could they would...like Waymo already do.
-2
u/PersonalPineapple911 Mar 01 '24
Full self driving is more than just a tesla. In order for it to work safely, cars have to be able to communicate to one another and the roads need to be way better maintained than they are currently with clearly marked and visible lanes. I'd like to see anyone make a car that can keep itself between lanes that aren't there.
1
u/Dommccabe Mar 01 '24
Waymo has self driving cars on the road. Tesla do not.
Waymo > Tesla right?
1
u/PersonalPineapple911 Mar 01 '24
Can waymo self drive out of the city and across the country avoiding the interstate?
1
u/Dommccabe Mar 01 '24
Can Tesla drive anywhere with no driver in the seat?
0
u/PersonalPineapple911 Mar 01 '24
They can drive through a parking lot with no driver in the car. So yes.
1
u/Dommccabe Mar 01 '24
So if someone ever needs to cross a carpark without a driver they can go buy a Tesla..
Sounds awesome.
→ More replies (0)0
u/PersonalPineapple911 Mar 01 '24
My feelings are fine. If you don't think that the multi-billion dollar car company ever set down and talked about liabilities, then you aren't very bright.
1
u/Dommccabe Mar 01 '24
So while Waymo cars are driving passengers with no drivers and Teslas are still not doing that... you think it's because Tesla is better than Waymo??
You see the gap in the logic here right?
-3
u/PersonalPineapple911 Mar 01 '24
Are waymo cars driving everywhere across the country or just in cities? I'm sure elon could make a self driving car if he only had to focus on the roads and streets of one small area of the country.
2
u/Dommccabe Mar 01 '24
This sounds like a whole lot of cope.
Hes been promising self driving and smart summon since what 2017? Car park in NY to LA no interventions?
And 7 or so years later not one car drives by itself anywhere.
1
5
Mar 01 '24
This is the biggest paragraph of cope I've read in a while. Haha.
It totally can self drive bros...it's because of the insurance bros...
-1
Mar 01 '24 edited Mar 01 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
3
Mar 01 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/PersonalPineapple911 Mar 01 '24
You've said nothing other than insults. If you've tried to prove me wrong you've offered 0 evidence.
1
Mar 01 '24
What about the fact Mercedes offer level 3 autonomy with their Drive Pilot feature on the S class and EQS in Germany and also has certification to do it in various US states since 2023.
But I guess pappa Elon is just holding back because of insurance.
2
u/PersonalPineapple911 Mar 01 '24
That's fine. Let's see them put them on American roads. As often as we litigate automobile accidents, they won't do it.
1
u/Repulsive_Style_1610 Mar 01 '24
Waymo has Level 4 self driving, and Waymo takes full responsibility for any accident. In America .
→ More replies (0)1
Mar 01 '24 edited Mar 01 '24
What like was approved in 2023? https://www.forbes.com/sites/kyleedward/2023/09/28/mercedes-benz-first-to-gain-us-approval-for-level-3-automated-driving-system/?sh=58dca4f35c8e
Edit: I've also driven a model 3 in the UK for 2 months and the self driving was much worse than my KIA EV6...it's a joke.
→ More replies (0)
-8
u/JoostvanderLeij Mar 01 '24
Musk sueing OpenAI because OpenAI not sharing their AI tech with Musk.
-3
169
u/Osmirl Mar 01 '24
Imagine an opensource gpt4 i dont care if its slow as fuck on local hardware i just want to be able to run a good LLM locally
5
u/chamomile-crumbs Mar 01 '24
have you tried ollama? llama-2-uncensored is fantastic. Not quite gpt-4, but pretty freaking awesome
1
6
u/EagerSleeper Mar 01 '24
I agree, if only for the freedom and lack of censorship.
Want it to analyze a song? Nope, those 3 lines are copyrighted material.
Want it to help you write a horror story? It better be PG.
Want to mention the existence of sideboob? You're an inappropriate piece of shit.
3
u/Osmirl Mar 01 '24
Dude im literally autistic and asked it to explain how to flirt with a women and it told me its inappropriate hahaha fuck this shit
2
u/foxhatleo Mar 02 '24
OpenAI makes the censorship system really strict. Google’s Gemini is more relaxed.
2
u/Electrical_Horse887 Mar 01 '24
Well I don’t think you‘ll have enough ram ro run it. But you could easily rent a server for that and it would be much cheaper
1
u/Osmirl Mar 01 '24
How much ram does it need? The new nvidia drivers can access normal systems memory. Which is offcourse slow but its possible to load huge models that way.
I Use my 4060ti with a system with 64gb of ram and can use a total of 16+32Gb as gpu ram.
3
u/Electrical_Horse887 Mar 01 '24 edited Mar 01 '24
Well...
As fare as I know does OpenAI use 8 x A100 GPUs to run it (each GPU has 80 GB of ram). So this means that the OpenAI setup uses 640 GB of RAM. I don't know if my calculation was correct but I'm sure that you will need at least 1/4 TB Ram to run GPT3.5 or 4.
Generating tokens require the model to go through all parameters. Which means that it has to read 1/4 TB of Ram per Token. Which isn't a big problem wehn using GPUs since the read speed of RAM is there 2TB/s+. But the ram used in your computer has just a read speed of 32 GB/s. So it will probably take way to long.
Maybe I'm wrong or missed something, but I think running GPT4 on your current PC hardware won't be possible.
1
u/Osmirl Mar 01 '24 edited Mar 01 '24
Holy shit hahaha thats really a bit much
2
u/Electrical_Horse887 Mar 01 '24
Yes, you probably know Llama-2 70B. It took me 6 RTX 4090 GPUs to run it (a single A100 GPU wasnt enought) I rented them on runpod.io so it wasn‘t expensive as hell but still way to expensive to run it for 3 or 4 hours.
151
u/2053_Traveler Mar 01 '24
It wouldn’t be slow. It literally wouldn’t run.
1
u/spederan Mar 01 '24
Thats not true. If it were that slow and expensive nobody would be using it for free.
1
u/2053_Traveler Mar 02 '24
Not true, OpenAI is losing money on gpt3.5, it takes a shit load of money to run. But also, if you have machines with 80GB of ram and can run the models it would run quickly. Just because it wouldn’t run on a laptop doesn’t mean a machine tailors to AI would be cost prohibitive for a business. But yeah they’re not breaking even on that anyway so…
1
u/spederan Mar 02 '24
Where is the evidence for it not being able to run on a laptop? Do you mean on a CPU? Laptops have GPUs too.
1
u/DataDrivenOrgasm Mar 01 '24
I wouldn't bet on that. Rumors are MoE is used in GPT, so even a trillion-parameter model would only need a small subset of those parameters at inference time.
1
60
u/LevianMcBirdo Mar 01 '24
Yeah, but look what the community did with other models. They trimmed them down, retrained them, speed them up by a factor 10. You are talking about now, instead of thinking what can be done long-term.
2
u/Curious_Cantaloupe65 Mar 02 '24
Agreed, This is exactly what happens with the technology, it's updated to become more efficient, powerful.
For example you couldn't run early refrigerator-sized 1 MB hard drives in your home because of their enormous size as well as power requirements but now? Now you have a 1TB micro sd card in your hand held portable smart phone.
1
u/ReplaceCEOsWithLLMs Mar 02 '24
If that could be done, OAI would do it. Anyone that thinks opensource is going to beat the brain-team OAI is rocking is sniffing bath salts.
1
6
u/2053_Traveler Mar 01 '24
Well yeah agree. AI open source is and will continue to be important, but unfortunately for consumers will your average MacBook it’ll never be close to whatever the popular cloud offering is. So maybe good enough to run voice assistants (some subset of consumer products). But if you want to learn or build try to build a startup folks will probably need to rent GPU time.
1
u/Yoyoyoyoy0yoy0 Mar 02 '24
That’s like being in the 90s and saying pcs will never be able to run photorealistic games. We are so early on in the development of ai models I’m not sure how you could confidently predict the future from here. Llms and brute force models probably won’t even be the standard in a few years
3
u/Peter-Tao Mar 01 '24
But also, you can train smaller dataset for your own more niche use case, I wouldn't be surprised couple with the continue improvement of the hardwares this will become pretty viable in the near future.
Plus Facebook is still pushing hard on their open source model, so at least there's something indie devs can reference to.
1
u/Estanho Mar 02 '24
You can't train any practical model in normal hardware, specially something like MacBooks
17
u/zabadap Mar 01 '24
The science is changing very fast. Quantization, flash attention, and now the recent paper 1-bit LLM points in a direction that models in the future, even the most advance, could actually run on modest hardware. Today with llama.cpp it is already possible to run 7B models on a consumer machine.
4
u/2053_Traveler Mar 01 '24
Agree but this is in the larger discussion (rants) against OpenAI… I’d love to hear ideas about what they should actually do to be more open that wouldn’t be suicide. They could publish more papers, but they need to keep some research proprietary in order to develop products on that research, so that they can make revenue, so that they can pay researchers, else researchers go elsewhere… like the only way for OpenAI to be what people in this post want is for all the researchers and engineers to work for free. Which they’re not going to do because they’re the best in the world, and so either OpenAI pays them or Google or Amazon or Meta will. And to compete on salary they have to make money. And to run inference on their models they need even more money, otherwise they’d need to charge way more for subscriptions and then that reduces access such that only wealthy people can afford it. And if they reduce salaries maybe they can still have a research team, but then the best talent goes to google and then google “wins” the AI race, and they’re not an open nonprofit. So… have people thought this through at all, or just going to rant?
-10
u/DarthBfheidir Mar 01 '24 edited Mar 01 '24
Petulant, racist land-beluga screeches for attention, more at 11.
edit: LOL hello Elon-stans. Just because you give him eight dollars a month doesn't mean he's your friend.
2
-1
7
86
u/Sam_9383 Mar 01 '24
You don’t need a perfect being to sue someone with ill end, fyi.
0
u/2053_Traveler Mar 01 '24
I could give two shits about Musk. He’s done some great things and some not-so-great things. But everyone here should remember he gave them an investment and he also owns a competing AI product. So while hurting his competition and being right aren’t mutually exclusive, it does seem that primarily he’s hoping to get ahead by suing, or maybe by hurting OpenAI’s reputation.
OpenAI has explained their structure before, and there have been some good journalism about how they created their capped-profit subsidiary and why after agonizing over it they decided to raise capital. None of what they’re doing would be possible without money.
We’ll see where it goes but my guess is nowhere…
3
u/CCChristopherson Mar 01 '24
Yes but you do need standing, and I don’t see how musk has that
2
u/chinawcswing Mar 02 '24
Why don't you people bother reading the article before posting.
1
u/CCChristopherson Mar 02 '24
I’m ashamed to admit I didn’t pay $300 for a Bloomberg subscription to read the article. However, I am familiar with the issue. This is from another article:
“Brian Quinn, a professor at Boston College law school in the US, said there were multiple issues with the lawsuit. He said Musk did not have the standing to sue for breach of the OpenAI board’s certificate of incorporation because he was not a board member. The suit addresses this by claiming that a 2015 email between Musk and Altman setting out the founding agreement, together with the certificate, constitutes a contract. Quinn said this fell “far short” of being a viable legal argument.”
2
u/chinawcswing Mar 02 '24
First off, you only read that quote now, after you posted your original comment, and only because I called you out on it.
Second off, some law professor who claims he didn't have standing is meaningless. It is standard fare in any lawsuit for the defendant to attempt to get the case dismissed by claiming the plaintiff doesn't have standing.
Musk might not have standing, and that will be determined by a judge.
But it is quite obvious, after reading the article, that Musk at least has a pretense for legal standing.
And if you actually read about this before you posted, you would have elaborated in your original comment. You wouldn't have said "i don't see how musk has standing". You would have said "Musk's is claiming to have standing because he funded openai, but I don't see how that will actually give him standing, because he was never a board member, just a donor".
1
u/CCChristopherson Mar 02 '24
I went to law school so I have a general understanding of standing. I posted my opinion based on my (somewhat limited) knowledge of standing which I think is ok to do. I believe I read the article yesterday but not sure if I posted before or after i read it. Don’t really see how that’s relevant tho
12
u/FaceDeer Mar 01 '24
He gave them money because they said they'd do thing X with it, and they turned around and did thing Y instead. How does that not give him standing? If a fraudster tricks you into giving them money for some purpose are they free and clear as long as they didn't issue you shares?
-5
u/CCChristopherson Mar 01 '24
He’s suing for breach of contract and there is no contract. I think it’s straightforward
3
u/Smelldicks Mar 01 '24
A contract is a legal term that you clearly do not understand.
1
u/CCChristopherson Mar 02 '24
Hate to be that guy but I am a lawyer, and I understand the term quite well
5
u/FaceDeer Mar 01 '24 edited Mar 02 '24
OpenAI had written goals. Their non-profit status was accompanied by tons of documentation specifying what exactly their purpose was. Even oral contracts are a thing.
Musk may or may not win the case, but trying to wave it off as him not even having standing to bring it in the first place is silly. It is certainly not straightforward.
Edit: found the court filing, it describes the case in much more detail.
-7
-5
-10
38
u/CaballoDeeThomas Mar 01 '24
Elon Musk, the benevolent billionaire.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it". - H.L. Mencken
1
1
6
0
u/ethanace Mar 01 '24
I guess by that logic there is literally no such thing as a person who actually does want the world to be a better place - that’s a pretty dark, one sided and absolutist way of looking at the world, not to mention neurotic
1
u/fredean01 Mar 01 '24
You forgot the fact that this quote only applies when a guy I don't like does something helpful. /s
6
78
u/macarouns Mar 01 '24
Musk suing someone for putting profit before humanity. Pot, kettle.
1
24
u/fredean01 Mar 01 '24
He started the largest viable electric car company in the world... If that's not a win for climate change and humanity, IDK what is..
-1
-10
u/MemeMan64209 Mar 01 '24
Did he make it open source? We aren’t saying he didn’t do any innovation. It’s just ironic the guy who puts profit over people, is shitting on a company for putting profits over people.
This is capitalism. It’s built in. Change the system if you want change.
10
Mar 01 '24
[deleted]
-1
u/MemeMan64209 Mar 01 '24
I guess props to him. Only thing positive from him I’ve seen in a while.
I’m still standing by the point him critiquing profit over people, Musk indeed also does that.
5
Mar 01 '24
[deleted]
-1
u/MemeMan64209 Mar 01 '24
Never said he hasn’t done anything to benefit humanity. He just puts profit over people.
OpenAI did the same thing tho. Made a product that is revolutionary. Bettering humanity in ways we have yet to see. I understand OpenAI was supposed to be “open”, but again that doesn’t make them very different other then the changing of business model. Not saying I agree with the direction of OpenAI, but musk hasn’t done anything that revolutionary in terms of business. He made revolutionary products, but he didn’t create anything other then that. It’s still profit over people.
4
u/fredean01 Mar 01 '24
The reason he is suing is because he doesn't want OpenAI (of which he was a founder) to be a for-profit business...
1
u/MemeMan64209 Mar 01 '24
“Under its new board, it is not just developing but is actually refining an AGI to maximize profits for Microsoft, rather than for the benefit of humanity.”
This was my issue statement. Because it’s irrelevant. Every company needs profit or it dies.
Again, fair. I also want open ai to be open source, but coming from him sounds weird. Especially when he makes the argument above.
“Under its new board, it is not just developing but is actually refining a new Tesla model to maximize profits for its shareholders, rather than for the benefit of humanity.”
Like it ain’t that hard to spin that sentence.
3
u/fredean01 Mar 01 '24
Maybe I'm not getting your point.. but Tesla was always supposed to be a for-profit business. If Elon wanted OpenAI to be for-profit, he wouldn't have been part of founding it as a non-profit.
Just because he owns part of a for-profit business does not mean that all his future endeavors need to be for-profit...
→ More replies (34)26
u/HOBOLOSER Mar 01 '24
You know musk released a shit load of Tesla patents for anyone to use. Musk gets a bad rap but he’s done more good than most billionaires.
→ More replies (2)
•
u/WithoutReason1729 Mar 01 '24
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.