Elon Musk sues Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and OpenAI [pdf]

At best a court forces OpenAI to be more transparent and clear about its for-profit motives (they couldn't hide behind the open, for-the-good-of-mankind mask forever anyways). Maybe even rebrand to stop misusing the terms 'open' and 'non-profit'.

At worst, court rules out the case and we see an OpenAI IPO and another evil company (very much like Google is born) founded on cutting every corner possible to solicit funds as a for-profit non-profit ?? all while stealing intellectual property and profiting their shareholders.

The "reaffirmations" referred to on page 15 don't mean anything. Altman merely said he was "enthusiastic" about the nonprofit structure, not that he was limiting OpenAI to it. And notably, the "I" is that quote is bracketed, meaning that Altman did not actually say "I" in his response to Musk (in legal documents, brackets in quotes mean that the quote has been altered between the brackets). Furthermore, despite the headline to that section claiming "repeat" reaffirmations, based on the facts as presented by Musk's own lawyers, Altman only potentially reaffirms the nonprofit structure once...

And the other individuals aren't even quoted, which is strong evidence that they didn't actually say anything even remotely in support of "reaffirming" the nonprofit structure (especially given that his lawyers were heavy handed with including quotes when they could be even remotely construed in favor of Musk's position) and that Musk is unilaterally characterizing whatever they actually said to support his claims, however reasonable or unreasonable that may be.

Due to the money at stake, and given that both Musk and Altman have serious credibility issues that would make a trial outcome impossible to predict, I expect this to be settled by giving Musk a bunch of stock in the for-profit entity to make shut up.

The link shows only the following:

>@danielpsegundo that would be of interest though I'd hate to bet against elon winning

We cannot see what Dan asked to understand what Sam is responding to.

the way openai structure their pay is dubious to say the least. maybe they will find a way to make money someday but rn everything they are doing is setting my alarm bells off.

"In conversations with recruiters we’ve heard from some candidates that OpenAI is communicating that they don’t expect to turn a profit until they reach their mission of Artificial General Intelligence" https://www.levels.fyi/blog/openai-compensation.html

> optimism that ruled in the 90s

This is such an interesting take, about which we could probably write whole paragraphs.

Can the 90s be really summarized in such way? Yes, we had the "information highway" and "waiting for year 2000", but at the same time people distrusted their governments. X-files was all the rage, maybe grunge.

In USA there was Bill Clinton - the president that didnt do any wars and balanced the budget.. who got removed for blowjobs. But at the same time there was outsourcing. In rest of the world it also cannot be summed up so easily - I remember that 90s were a struggle, especially for post communism countries.

Obviously later on we got cell phones, but we also got the cancer such as Jack Welch style management that lead to various methods of enshittyfying everything.

I had a talk some time ago - I have a genuine polo bought in a supermarket in the 1980s (wont tell the brand since it is irrelevant). This piece of cloth feels and fits very well - after 40 years. It was worn through many summers. Now I cant buy a polo shirt that will last more than 2 seasons. And I buy the "better" ones. There is lots of crap that falls apart fast. For me the 90s were a start of that trend - enshittification of products that are designed to last 25 months (with a 24 month guarantee) and be thrown away.

But maybe it depends on life experience and anecdotes.

Was there optimism in 90s? Lots of it in marketing materials. But did people really believe that?